Fordyce, Christopher B

Background: Mortality remains high in patients with ST-segment–elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) complicated by cardiogenic shock (CS), and early reperfusion has been shown to improve outcomes. We analyzed the association between first medical contact (FMC)-to-percutaneous coronary angiography time with mortality and major adverse cardiovascular events among patients with STEMI with and without CS. Methods: We performed a retrospective analysis of the Vancouver Coastal Health Authority STEMI registry, including all patients with STEMI who received primary percutaneous coronary angiography between January 1, 2010, and December 31, 2020, and stratified them by presence or absence of CS at hospital arrival. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality, the secondary outcome was in-hospital major adverse cardiovascular events, defined as a composite of the first occurrence of mortality, cardiac arrest, heart failure, intracerebral hemorrhage, cerebrovascular accident, or reinfarction. Mixed effects logistic regression with restricted cubic splines was used to estimate the relationships between FMC-to-device time and the outcomes in the CS and non-CS groups. Results: 2929 patients were included, 9.4% (n=275) had CS. Median FMC-to-device time was 113.5 (interquartile range, 93.0–145.0) and 103.0 (interquartile range, 85.0–130.0) minutes for patients with CS and without CS, respectively. More patients with CS had FMC-to-device times above guideline recommendations (76.6% versus 54.1%, P <0.001). Between 60 and 90 minutes, for each 10-minute increase in FMC-to-device time, absolute mortality for patients with CS increased by 4% to 7%, whereas for patients without CS, it increased by <0.5%. Conclusions: Among patients with STEMI undergoing primary percutaneous coronary angiography, reperfusion delays among patients with CS are associated with significantly worse outcomes. Strategies to reduce FMC-to-device times for patients with STEMI presenting with CS are required.

AbstractAimsThe aims of the Critical Care Cardiology Trials Network (CCCTN) are to develop a registry to investigate the epidemiology of cardiac critical illness and to establish a multicentre research network to conduct randomised clinical trials (RCTs) in patients with cardiac critical illness.Methods and resultsThe CCCTN was founded in 2017 with 16 centres and has grown to a research network of over 40 academic and clinical centres in the United States and Canada. Each centre enters data for consecutive cardiac intensive care unit (CICU) admissions for at least 2 months of each calendar year. More than 20 000 unique CICU admissions are now included in the CCCTN Registry. To date, scientific observations from the CCCTN Registry include description of variations in care, the epidemiology and outcomes of all CICU patients, as well as subsets of patients with specific disease states, such as shock, heart failure, renal dysfunction, and respiratory failure. The CCCTN has also characterised utilization patterns, including use of mechanical circulatory support in response to changes in the heart transplantation allocation system, and the use and impact of multidisciplinary shock teams. Over years of multicentre collaboration, the CCCTN has established a robust research network to facilitate multicentre registry-based randomised trials in patients with cardiac critical illness.ConclusionThe CCCTN is a large, prospective registry dedicated to describing processes-of-care and expanding clinical knowledge in cardiac critical illness. The CCCTN will serve as an investigational platform from which to conduct randomised controlled trials in this important patient population.

Objective To evaluate informal physician judgement versus pretest probability scores in estimating risk in patients with suspected coronary artery disease (CAD). Methods We included 4533 patients from the PROMISE (Prospective Multicenter Imaging Study for Evaluation of Chest Pain) trial. Physicians categorised a priori the pretest probability of obstructive CAD (≥70% or ≥50% left main); Diamond-Forrester (D-F) and European Society of Cardiology (ESC) pretest probability estimates were calculated. Agreement was calculated using the κ statistic; logistic regression evaluated estimates of pretest CAD probability and actual CAD (as determined by CT coronary angiography), and clinical outcomes were modelled using Cox proportional hazard models. Results Physician estimates agreed poorly with D-F (κ 0.16; 95% CI 0.14 to 0.18) and ESC (κ 0.04; 95% CI 0.02 to 0.05). Actual obstructive CAD was significantly more prevalent in both the high-likelihood (OR 3.30; 95% CI 2.30 to 4.74) and the intermediate-likelihood (OR 1.43; 95% CI 1.16 to 1.76) physician-estimated groups versus the low-likelihood group; ESC similarly differentiated between the three groups (OR 9.07; 95% CI 2.87 to 28.70; and OR 3.87; 95% CI 1.22 to 12.28). However, using D-F, only the high-probability group differed (OR 2.49; 95% CI 1.74 to 3.54). Only physician estimates were associated with a higher incidence of adjusted death/myocardial infarction/unstable angina hospitalisation in the high-probability versus low-probability group (HR 2.68; 95% CI 1.52 to 4.74); neither pretest probability score provided prognostic information. Conclusions Compared with D-F and ESC estimates, physician judgement more accurately identified obstructive CAD and worse patient outcomes. Integrating physician judgement may improve risk prediction for patients with stable chest pain. Trial registration number NCT01174550 .

Abstract Aims The incidence of respiratory failure and use of invasive or non-invasive mechanical ventilation (MV) in the cardiac intensive care units (CICUs) is increasing. While institutional MV volumes are associated with reduced mortality in medical and surgical ICUs, this volume–mortality relationship has not been characterized in the CICU. Methods and results National population-based data were used to identify patients admitted to CICUs (2005–2015) requiring MV in Canada. CICUs were categorized into low (≤100), intermediate (101–300), and high (&gt;300) volume centres based on spline knots identified in the association between annual MV volume and mortality. Outcomes of interest included all-cause in-hospital mortality, the proportion of patients requiring prolonged MV (&gt;96 h) and CICU length of stay (LOS). Among 47 173 CICU admissions requiring MV, 89.5% (42 200) required invasive MV. The median annual CICU MV volume was 43 (inter-hospital range 1–490). Compared to low-volume centres (35.9%), in-hospital mortality was lower in intermediate [29.2%, adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 0.84, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.72–0.97, P = 0.019] and high-volume (18.2%; aOR 0.82, 95% CI 0.66–1.02, P = 0.076) centres. Prolonged MV was higher in low-volume (29.2%) compared to high-volume (14.8%, aOR 0.70, 95% CI 0.55–0.89, P = 0.003) and intermediate-volume (23.0%, aOR 0.85, 95% CI 0.68–1.06, P = 0.14] centres. Mortality and prolonged MV were lower in percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI)-capable and academic centres, but a shorter CICU LOS was observed only in subgroup of PCI-capable intermediate- and high-volume hospitals. Conclusions In a national dataset, we observed that higher CICU MV volumes were associated with lower incidence of in-hospital mortality, prolonged MV, and CICU LOS. Our data highlight the need for minimum MV volume benchmarks for CICUs caring for patients with respiratory failure.