Patel, Nish

Introduction: Hypertension is an important modifiable risk factor for cardiovascular diseases. Cuffless blood pressure monitors (CL-BPMs) have emerged as convenient alternatives to traditional cuff-based monitors (C-BPMs). We aim to compare both modalities quantitatively and elaborate on the diagnostic accuracy of CL-BPM. We also discuss the need to address shortcomings of CL-BPMs that limit their current use in widespread clinical practice. Methods: We pooled data from 14 studies that simultaneously compared CL-BPM and C-BPM for ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM). The results were reported as mean differences (MD) in systolic and diastolic blood pressures (SBP and DBP) between the two modalities. Inverse variance weighted analysis was used to calculate pooled estimates. Tau 2 and I 2 statistics were used to assess heterogeneity. Results: A total of 1011 participants were included. Meta-analysis showed a 24-hour MD of 3.18 [95% CI 1.18-5.19, P=0.002] for SBP and 1.79 [95% CI (-0.43)-4, P=0.11] for DBP, with moderate and high heterogeneity (I 2 = 45% and 78%), respectively. MD in daytime SBP and DBP between the two modalities were 2.52 [95% CI 0.41-4.63, P=0.02] and 0.89 [95% CI (-1.17)-2.96, P=0.4], respectively. An MD of 9.02 [95% CI 4.56-13.49, P<0.0001] was observed for nighttime SBP, whereas it was 6.67 [95% CI 2.59-10.75, P=0.001] for nighttime DBP. Our findings suggest a significant difference in means of 24h SPB, day SBP, night SBP, and DBP between the two modalities, suggesting that cuffless monitors are not on par with cuffed monitors for these measurements. However, there was no significant difference in the means of 24-hour DBP and daytime DBP between the two modalities, suggesting that the cuffless devices were as accurate as the cuffed monitors in these scenarios. Conclusion: CL-BPMs showed an overall significant MD in BP compared to the standard C-BPM. Although the CL-BPM may be convenient, user-friendly, and help eliminate limb-circumference-based cuff sizing, it has some challenges. These include complex calibration protocols; accuracy concerns in several subgroups like individuals with dark skin tone, obesity, and pregnancy; and inability to track BP during sleep, exercise, and while on antihypertensives. Substantial heterogeneity in the results indicates a lack of standardized validation protocols. Detailed studies and subgroup analyses are required to validate these devices before their widespread use in clinical practice.

ObjectiveThe aim of our study was to study the impact of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors (GPI) on in‐hospital outcomes.BackgroundThere is paucity of data regarding the impact of GPI on the outcomes following peripheral endovascular interventions.MethodsThe study cohort was derived from Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project (HCUP) Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) database between the years 2006 and 2011. Peripheral endovascular interventions and GPI utilization were identified using appropriate ICD‐9 Diagnostic and procedural codes. Two‐level hierarchical multivariate mixed models were created. The study outcomes were: primary (in‐hospital mortality and amputation studied separately) and secondary (composite of in‐hospital mortality and postprocedural complications). Hospitalization costs were also assessed.ResultsGPI utilization (OR, 95% CI, P‐value) was independently predictive of lower amputation rates (0.36, 0.27–0.49, <0.001). There was no significant difference in terms of in‐hospital mortality (0.59, 0.31–1.14, P 0.117), although GPI use predicted worse secondary outcomes (1.23, 1.03–1.47, 0.023). Following propensity matching, the amputation rate was lower (3.2% vs. 8%, P < 0.001), while hospitalization costs were higher in the cohort that received GPI ($21,091 ± 404 vs. 19,407 ± 133, P < 0.001).ConclusionsMultivariate analysis revealed GPI use in peripheral endovascular interventions to be suggestive of an increase in composite end‐point of in‐hospital mortality and postprocedural complications, no impact on in‐hospital mortality alone, significantly lower rate of amputation, and increase in hospitalization costs. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

ABSTRACTPrior studies have highlighted disparities in cardiac lifesaving procedure utilization, particularly among women and in minorities. Although there has been a significant increase in implantable cardioverter‐defibrillator (ICD) insertion, socioeconomic disparities still exist in the trend of ICD utilization. With the use of the Nationwide Inpatient Sample from 2003 through 2011, we identified subjects with ICD insertion (procedure code 37.94) and cardiac resynchronization defibrillator (procedure code 00.50, 00.51) as codified by the International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification. Overall, 1 020 076 ICDs were implanted in the United States from 2003 to 2011. We observed an initial increase in ICD utilization by 51%, from 95 062 in 2003 to 143 262 in 2006, followed by a more recent decline. The majority of ICDs were implanted in men age ≥65 years. Implantation of ICDs was 2.5× more common in men than in women (402 per million vs 163 per million). Approximately 95% of the ICDs were implanted in insured patients, and 5% were used in the uninsured population. There has been a significant increase in ICD implantation in blacks, from 162 per million in 2003 to 291 per million in 2011. We found a significant difference in the volume of ICD implants between the insured and the uninsured patient populations. Racial disparities have narrowed significantly in comparison with those noted in earlier studies and are now more reflective of the population demographics at large. On the other hand, significant gender disparities continue to exist.

ABSTRACTFibrinolytic therapy is still used in patients with ST‐segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) when the primary percutaneous coronary intervention cannot be provided in a timely fashion. Management strategies and outcomes in transferred fibrinolytic‐treated STEMI patients have not been well assessed in real‐world settings. Using the Nationwide Inpatient Sample from 2008 to 2012, we identified 18 814 patients with STEMI who received fibrinolytic therapy and were transferred to a different facility within 24 hours. The primary outcome was in‐hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes included gastrointestinal bleeding, bleeding requiring transfusion, intracranial hemorrhage (ICH), length of stay, and cost. The patients were divided into 3 groups: those who received medical therapy alone (n = 853; 4.5%), those who underwent coronary artery angiography without revascularization (n = 2573; 13.7%), and those who underwent coronary artery angiography with revascularization (n = 15 388; 81.8%). Rates of in‐hospital mortality among the groups were 20% vs 6.6% vs 2.1%, respectively (P < 0.001); ICH was 8.5% vs 1.1% vs 0.6%, respectively (P < 0.001); and gastrointestinal bleeding was 1.1% vs 0.4% vs 0.4%, respectively (P = 0.011). Multivariate analysis identified increasing age, higher Charlson Comorbidity Index score, cardiogenic shock, cardiac arrest, and ICH as the independent predictors of not performing coronary artery angiography and/or revascularization in patients with STEMI initially treated with fibrinolytic therapy. The majority of STEMI patients transferred after receiving fibrinolytic therapy undergo coronary angiography. However, notable numbers of patients do not receive revascularization, especially patients with cardiogenic shock and following a cardiac arrest.

Purpose: To examine the impact of intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) utilization during lower limb endovascular interventions as regards postprocedural complications and amputation. Methods: The study cohort was derived from the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project Nationwide Inpatient Sample database between the years 2006 and 2011. Peripheral endovascular interventions were identified using appropriate ICD-9 procedure codes. Two-level hierarchical multivariate mixed models were created. The co-primary outcomes were in-hospital mortality and amputation; the secondary outcome was postprocedural complications. Model results are given as the odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). Hospitalization costs were also assessed. Results: Overall, among the 92,714 patients extracted from the database during the observation period, IVUS was used in 1299 (1.4%) patients. IVUS utilization during lower extremity peripheral vascular procedures was independently predictive of a lower rate of postprocedural complications (OR 0.80, 95% CI 0.66 to 0.99, p=0.037) as well as lower amputation rates (OR 0.59, 95% CI 0.45 to 0.77, p<0.001) without any significant impact on in-hospital mortality. Multivariate analysis also revealed IVUS utilization to be predictive of a nonsignificant increase in hospitalization costs ($1333, 95% CI −$167 to +$2833, p=0.082). Conclusion: IVUS use during lower limb endovascular interventions is predictive of lower postprocedural complication and amputation rates with a nonsignificant increase in hospitalization costs.

ObjectiveThe aim of the study was to assess the utilization of catheter‐directed thrombolysis (CDT) and its comparative effectiveness against systemic thrombolysis in acute pulmonary embolism (PE).BackgroundContemporary real world data regarding utilization and outcomes comparing systemic thrombolysis with CDT for PE is sparse.MethodsWe queried the Nationwide Inpatient Sample from 2010 to 2012 using the ICD‐9‐CM diagnosis code 415.11, 415.13, and 415.19 for acute PE. We used propensity score analysis to compare outcomes between systemic thrombolysis and CDT. Primary outcome was in‐hospital mortality. Secondary outcome was combined in‐hospital mortality and intracranial hemorrhage (ICH).ResultsOut of 110,731 patients hospitalized with PE, we identified 1,521 patients treated with thrombolysis, of which 1,169 patients received systemic thrombolysis and 352 patients received CDT. After propensity‐matched comparison, primary and secondary outcomes were significantly lower in the CDT group compared to systemic thrombolysis (21.81% vs. 13.36%, OR 0.55, 95% CI 0.36–0.85, P value = 0.007) and (22.89% vs. 13.36%, OR 0.52, 95% CI 0.34–0.80, P value = 0.003), respectively. The median length of stay [7 days, interquartile range (IQR) (5–9 days) vs. 7 days, IQR (5–10 days), P = 0.17] was not significant between the two groups. The CDT group had higher cost of hospitalization [$17,218, IQR ($12,272–$23,906) vs. $23,799, IQR ($17,892–$35,338), P < 0.001]. Multivariate analysis identified increasing age, saddle PE, cardiopulmonary arrest, and Medicaid insurance as independent predictors of in‐hospital mortality.ConclusionsCDT was associated with lower in‐hospital mortality and combined in‐hospital mortality and ICH. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.