Guru, Pramod

Objective Extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR) utilizes veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) in cardiac arrest patients to reduce the risk of mortality and multiorgan dysfunction from systemic hypoperfusion. We aimed to compare clinical outcomes of patients receiving ECPR versus conventional cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CCPR) for refractory cardiac arrest. Data Sources This was a systematic review and meta-analysis. A librarian searched the main databases, Ovid MEDLINE (including epub ahead of print, in-process & other non-indexed citations), Ovid EMBASE and Ovid Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from inception through July 2024. Study Selection We included randomized controlled trials and observational studies that compared the outcomes of ECPR to CCPR in cardiac arrest patients. Primary outcomes were neurological sequelae and survival. Data Extraction We followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Two reviewers independently screened articles, extracted data on selected articles and performed risk of bias assessments using ROBINS-I for non-randomized controlled trials and the revised Cochrane risk of bias tool for randomized controlled trials with disagreements settled by a third independent reviewer. Data Synthesis Out of 3458 studies identified and screened, 28 studies including 304,360 cardiac arrest patients met eligibility criteria and were included. Survival at hospital discharge was 20% for ECPR versus 3.3% for CCPR (OR 0.48 [CI 0.27, 0.84]). Favorable neurological outcome at hospital discharge was 11.8% for ECPR versus 1.9% for CCPR (OR 0.41 [CI 0.17, 1.01]). Complications from bleeding were ten times higher in the ECPR group (35.3% vs 3.7%; OR 0.08 [0.03, 0.24]). Conclusions ECPR appeared to be superior to CCPR for improved neurological outcome and survival in cardiac arrest patients, although bleeding was increased. There was large heterogeneity in the included studies and outcomes reported. Future prospective studies may improve the identification of subgroups of patients that will benefit most from ECPR. Systematic review and meta-analysis registration: PROSPERO - CRD42023394128.

Introduction/Background: Patients admitted with sepsis are at risk of developing septic cardiomyopathy (SCM), which may elevate their risk of short-term mortality. However, the effect of SCM on long-term outcomes after sepsis is poorly understood. This study explores whether patients with sepsis and SCM have worse long-term outcomes compared to those without SCM. Research Questions/Hypothesis: What are the long-term major adverse cardiovascular events, including death, stroke, and myocardial infarction (MACE) 36 months after ICU discharge for septic patients with abnormal global left ventricular strain (LV GLS)? Methods: We conducted a retrospective study of 396 sepsis patients from August 2018 to September 2022, approved by the Mayo Clinic IRB. Patient demographics, comorbidities, echo parameters, and outcomes were collected. Due to the expected non-linear relation between LV GLS and Hazard Ratio (HR) of MACE we employed Cox regression analysis with Restricted Cubic Splines. Secondly, we divided the population into 2 groups, patients with and without normal LV GLS (between -23 and -16). The effect of non-normal LV GLS on MACE was evaluated using Cox regression weight by inverse probability weighting (IPWT) analysis after propensity score assessment, adjusting for diabetes, hypertension, BMI, history of stroke or myocardial infarction, chronic kidney disease, age, and sex. Results: Demographic variables did not differ significantly based on normal versus abnormal LV GLS. In the restricted cox regression with cubic spline models, we observed that patients with normal values had HR lower than one compared with patients without normal values (Figure 1). Secondly, we found that the HR of MACE in patients with normal LV GLS was significantly lower in the crude analysis (HR 0.66 [CI 95% 0.5, 0.86]; p<0.01) and in the analysis adjusted by IPWT (HR 0.7 [CI 95% 0.53, 0.92]; p=0.01). Conclusion: Sepsis patients with abnormal global left ventricular strain (LV GLS) have a higher risk of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) within 36 months post-ICU discharge compared to those with normal strain. LV GLS values outside the range of -23 to -16 are associated with increased risk. Monitoring LV GLS in sepsis patients is important for identifying those at elevated risk for long-term cardiovascular complications.

Background: In the landscape of organ transplantation, heart transplantation stands as a life-saving procedure for patients with end-stage heart failure. Comprehensive analyses of transplant programs are imperative to optimize outcomes and understand the complexities. Hypothesis: This study hypothesizes that an increasing trend of heart transplant service and short-term mechanical circulatory support (STMCS) is the bridge to transplant; the UNOS (United Network for Organ Sharing) guideline positively impacts STMCS utilization. Even with the standard of care, there might be a disparity in receiving care in terms of gender and race. Goal/ Aims: By examining this center's collective experience, this research provides valuable insights into the evolving landscape of heart transplantation, ultimately contributing to advancements in patient care and transplant policy. Methods: This retrospective cohort study includes heart transplant patients in a single large transplant center. For statistical analysis, Cox regression, Mann-Whitney test, Kruskal Wallis, and Chi-Square test were used in IBM SPSS 25. Result: Trends: This retrospective study covering 2010 to 2022 comprehensively analyzed 1513 heart transplant patients. The cohort consisted of 1071 (70.78%) males and 442 (29.21%) females, 31.9% were bridged through STMCS. 76.7% of Caucasian and 16.1% were African American.The mean utilization of STMCS was 20.08% before the UNOS policy change, increasing to 53.81% after that (p < 0.001). Disparity Analysis: There was a statistically significant difference in STMCS utilization between white and black patients (p= 0.008) but no difference in between obese and non-obese cohorts (P=0.362).Wait time was similar among the genders (p=0.161) and different races (p=0.302). Survival Analysis: There is a significant survival discrepancy between patients bridged through MCS and those without STMCS(p< 0.001). However, yearly trend analysis showed an evolving survival trajectory favoring STMCS users. There are statistically significant survival differences among whites and blacks (P =0.008) but similar among the genders (p=0.589). Summary: The study reveals significant changes in the trend of transplants regarding STMCS utilization since the UNOS guideline. There are substantial differences in survival between STMCS vs. non-STMCS groups and among the races.There was a significant difference in STMCS utilization among the races.

AbstractNational performance metrics ultimately enhance patient decision‐making and promote meaningful improvements in health care delivery, which makes having valid and reliable measures essential. This study examined US News and World Report metrics from 2019 to 2012 and used electronic health record data, combined with detailed chart review across 3 in‐system hospitals, to assess the provision of care compared to the attribution of patients assigned to the ear, nose, and throat (ENT) mortality group. Of the initial 47 ENT‐attributed deaths, 23 of those were verified, dimensioning the mortality rate from 1.7% to just 0.8%. These results underscore the necessity of rethinking measures and mortality attribution methodologies to be more accurate. Current methods use Medicare Severity Diagnosis Related Group billing coding to map the attribution. We suggest transitioning away from specialty ranking approaches and towards a procedure and condition “rating” approach to ensure that these ranking types capture data about the provision of care within a given encounter.