Kumar, Arnav

Racial disparities in utilization and outcomes of mechanical circulatory support (MCS) in patients with acute myocardial infarction-cardiogenic shock (AMI-CS) are infrequently studied. This study sought to evaluate racial disparities in the outcomes of MCS in AMI-CS. The National Inpatient Sample (2012–2017) was used to identify adult AMI-CS admissions receiving MCS support. MCS devices were classified as intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP), percutaneous left ventricular assist device (pLVAD) or extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). Self-reported race was classified as white, black and others. Outcomes included in-hospital mortality, hospital length of stay and discharge disposition. During this period, 90,071 admissions were included with white, black and other races constituting 73.6%, 8.3% and 18.1%, respectively. Compared to white and other races, black race admissions were on average younger, female, with greater comorbidities, and non-cardiac organ failure (all p < 0.001). Compared to the white race (31.3%), in-hospital mortality was comparable in black (31.4%; adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 0.98 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.93–1.05); p = 0.60) and other (30.2%; aOR 0.96 (95% CI 0.92–1.01); p = 0.10). Higher in-hospital mortality was noted in non-white races with concomitant cardiac arrest, and those receiving ECMO support. Black admissions had longer lengths of hospital stay (12.1 ± 14.2, 10.3 ± 11.2, 10.9 ± 1.2 days) and transferred less often (12.6%, 14.2%, 13.9%) compared to white and other races (both p < 0.001). In conclusion, this study of AMI-CS admissions receiving MCS devices did not identify racial disparities in in-hospital mortality. Black admissions had longer hospital stay and were transferred less often. Further evaluation with granular data including angiographic and hemodynamic parameters is essential to rule out racial differences.

Background: Microvascular dysfunction is known to play a key role in patients with angina and nonobstructive coronary artery disease. We investigated the impact of ranolazine among patients with angina and nonobstructive coronary artery disease. Methods: In this randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled pilot trial, 26 patients with angina once weekly or more, abnormal stress test, and nonobstructive coronary artery disease (<50% stenosis by angiography and fractional flow reserve >0.80) were randomized 1:1 to ranolazine or placebo for 12 weeks. Primary end point was ΔSeattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ) angina frequency score. Baseline and 3 months follow-up SAQ, Duke Activity Status Index scores along with invasive fractional flow reserve, coronary flow reserve (CFR), hyperemic myocardial resistance, and cardiopulmonary exercise testing measurements were performed. Results: No significant differences in ΔSAQ angina frequency scores ( P =0.53) or Duke Activity Status Index ( P =0.76) were observed between ranolazine versus placebo, although patients on ranolazine had lesser improvement in SAQ physical limitation scores ( P =0.02) compared with placebo at 3 months. There were no significant differences in ΔCFR or Δhyperemic myocardial resistance between ranolazine and placebo groups. Patients treated with ranolazine, compared with placebo, had no significant improvement in maximum rate of oxygen consumption measured during incremental exercise (VO 2 max) and peak metabolic equivalents of task. Interestingly, in the ranolazine group, patients with baseline CFR<2.0 demonstrated greater gain in CFR compared with those with baseline CFR≥2.0 ( P =0.02). Conclusions: Ranolazine did not demonstrate improvement in SAQ angina frequency score, invasive microvascular function, or peak metabolic equivalent compared with placebo at 3 months. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT02147067.