Citations

Introduction: Giant intracranial aneurysms are uncommon, have a high risk for rupture and are difficult to treat. The International Study of Unruptured Intracranial Aneurysms (ISUIA) prospective cohort included 187 patients with maximal diameter of 25 mm or greater. This analysis was to determine the long-term prognosis of these aneurysms both treated and untreated. Methods: Patients were enrolled into ISUIA at 61 centers from 1991-1998. A prospective cohort included the managed with observation, surgery or endovascular treatment. Patients were followed for a median of 9.2 years. Aneurysms were measured using a central reading of bi-planar cerebral angiography. Outcomes were determined prospectively and with central review. Results: 187 patients with a maximum diameter of 25 mm were followed. The mean size was 30.3 mm, ranging from 25 to 63 mm. 39% of the aneurysms were surgically treated at baseline, 27% were endovascularly treated, and 32% were managed conservatively;3% had subsequent endovascular treatment and 5% surgical treatment. Patients with giant aneurysms were predominantly women (83%), had a baseline Rankin Score of in 93%, were located predominantly in the anterior circulation (internal carotid 44%, cavernous ICA 28%, middle cerebral 12%). 80% of the patients were symptomatic with cranial nerve deficit in 47% (III and VI nerves), mass effect in 16%, headaches in 44%, orbital pain in 21%, and vision loss in 25%. Smoking history was present in 67%, hypertension in 44%, vascular headaches in 29% and family history in 10%. 70 patients (39%) died during follow-up however 59% were still Rankin 1 or 2. Both surgical and endovascular treated patients had 60-64% good outcome and 34-36% mortality. Untreated patients had a 57% mortality. Subarachnoid hemorrhage occurred in 11 untreated patients and 12 treated patients with most occurring in the first year. Conclusions: Giant intracranial aneurysms are typically symptomatic, and have a high risk of rupture early after diagnosis. Outcome was similar with surgical and endovascular treatment but post-procedure hemorrhage did occur.

Objectives The Carotid Revascularization Endarterectomy versus Stenting Trial (CREST) showed no difference in the composite endpoint of stroke, myocardial infarction, or death between carotid artery stenting (CAS) and carotid endarterectomy (CEA) in patients with symptomatic or asymptomatic carotid stenosis (CS). We compared restenosis or occlusion, and repeat revascularization, between CAS and CEA over 2 years of follow-up. Methods Restenosis, occlusion, and repeat revascularization were assessed at 1, 6, 12 and 24 months post-randomization. Hemodynamically significant restenosis (≥70% diameter reduction) was defined by a peak systolic velocity (PSV) ≥300 cm/second on standardized duplex ultrasonography (DUS), occlusion by an absence of flow within the target artery on DUS, and repeat revascularization by any additional procedure (CEA, angioplasty or CAS) performed on the index artery. Studies were performed in CREST-certified laboratories and interpreted in the CREST Ultrasound Core Lab. Patients included in this report were those who received their assigned treatment within 30 days of randomization and had an ultrasound reviewed at the Core Lab (n=2191). Treatment differences were assessed using proportional hazards models adjusting for age, sex, and symptomatic status. Results In the analytic cohort, 1086 patients received CAS and 1105 received CEA. Over 2 years 113 patients developed restenosis, 56 (rate 5.8%) in the CAS group and 57 (rate 5.8%) in the CEA group; and 8 developed an occlusion, 3 (rate 0.3 %) in the CAS group and 5 (rate 0.5%) in the CEA group. The combined restenosis-occlusion rate was 6.0% (n=58) for CAS and 6.3% (n=62) for CEA (HR=0.90, 95% CI=0.63-1.29, p=0.58). Forty-three patients of the 2191 underwent repeat revascularization (20 CAS, 23 CEA, p=0.69) of which 28 had restenosis by our criteria and so were included ( Figure ). Stroke occurred in 13 (4 CAS; 9 CEA) of the 120 patients with restenosis or occlusion; 1 of the 4 CAS strokes occurred after restenosis was detected, and 5 of 9 CEA strokes occurred after restenosis was detected. Conclusions This analysis of carotid restenosis is the largest reported to date from any randomized clinical trial. Restenosis and occlusion were infrequent and similar up to 2 years following CAS or CEA among 2191 patients. The rates of revascularization likewise did not differ between CAS and CEA. Follow-up out to 10 years is ongoing. Figure. Kaplan-Meier curves of restenosis and occlusion over 2 years.

Background: Blood pressure (BP) measurement is a national core quality measure for hypertension care and hypertension control rates remain a major performance measure. It remains unclear whether improving measurement directly results in better control rates in hypertension management. Purpose: To utilize electronic medical records to explore the relationship between measurement of blood pressure and hypertension control rates among 4 eligible primary care providers groups - Primary Care Internal Medicine (PCIM), Family medicine (FM), General Internal Medicine (GIM), Preventive Medicine (PREV) - and 2 eligible specialist groups - Cardiology (CARD), Nephrology (NEPH) at an academic group medical practice. Methods: A two year cross sectional study involving adults seen by eligible primary or specialist providers at 2 or more office visits with a hypertension ICD-9 code in two years with at least one office visit in the measurement year. We measured the proportion of patients who had their BP measured at their last hypertension visit (LHV) in 2009 and 2010. We compared measurement rates with control rates as defined by the proportion of hypertension patients with BP < 140/90 mmHg at their LHV. Results: In 2009, 84.2% of 17989 patients (95% CI 83.6 - 84.7%) had their BP measured at their LHV compared to 85.3% (95% CI 84.8 - 85.8%) of 17992 patients in 2010, an increase of 1.2% (p=0.0026). Measurement rates varied widely across the different provider groups. PCIM, a high performing group, had significant improvement in measurement rates from 2009 to 2010 and demonstrated improvement in control rates. Lower performing groups, Nephrology and GIM, had significant improvement in measurement but did not see a direct translation to improved control rates. There was an associated worsening of the control rates for Preventive medicine along with a decrease in the measurement rates from 2009 to 2010. Conclusion: High BP measurement rates are associated with high hypertension control rates. Prioritizing BP measurement may result in improved intermediate outcomes in hypertension management.

Background: The diagnosis of hypertension requires systolic blood pressure (SBP) ≥ 140 mmHg or diastolic blood pressure (DBP) ≥ 90 mmHg on at least 2 different occasions. Therefore, there is the possibility of patients with elevated BP remaining undiagnosed if not seen by the same provider. Purpose: To utilize electronic medical records (EMR) to identify patients not previously diagnosed with hypertension that have elevated blood pressure meeting criteria for a diagnosis of hypertension using a threshold of SBP ≥ 140mmHg or DBP ≥ 90 mmHg (high BP) on 2 or more occasions. Methods: This was a cross sectional design utilizing retrospective multi-year billing and clinical data from a large multi-specialty center in the Midwest. Using electronic records of all outpatient visits in each year from 2009 - 2011, patients with at least 2 visits with SBP ≥ 140mmHg or DBP ≥ 90 mmHg (2HBP) in the measurement year were identified. These patients were compared with previously identified cohorts of known hypertension patients (Known HTN) compiled using the EMR problem list. A sensitivity analysis was done using patients with high BP at 2 consecutive visits (2CHBP) and also those with high BP at 3 consecutive visits (3CHBP). We compared proportions of patients with high BP without a prior diagnosis of hypertension (UDHTN). Results: The proportion of patients with SBP ≥ 140mmHg or DBP ≥ 90 mmHg without a prior diagnosis of hypertension (UDHTN) when compared to the cohort of known patients with a diagnosis of hypertension (Known HTN) was 25% in 2009, 26% in 2010, and 28% in 2011 in the 2CHBP cohort compared to 27% in 2009, 28% in 2010, and 30% in 2011 in the 2HBP cohort and 18% in 2009, 19% in 2010 and 23% in 2011 in the 3CHBP cohort. Conclusion: About a quarter of patients meeting current thresholds on multiple and consecutive visits did not have a known diagnosis of hypertension. The use of EMR can identify these patients for commencement of appropriate management. Table 1

Background: Hypertension (HTN) control rate is a core clinical quality measure. It is presently assessed by manual review of a random sample of patients with HTN billing claims. There is an increasing push by regulators towards the use of electronic medical records (EMR) to assess quality of care. Purpose: To use EMR to obtain a more in-depth assessment of quality of hypertension care. Methods: Cross sectional study involving adults with HTN seen at 2 or more office visits in 2009 by eligible primary or specialist providers at a large medical group practice. We measured the proportion of HTN patients with blood pressure (BP) at goal (BP < 140/90 mm Hg) at their last hypertension visit (LHV). Results: Of a total of 10,401 patients, 5970 (57%) were controlled and 1959 (19%) were uncontrolled at their LHV. Control could not be assessed in 2472 (24%) as BP values were unavailable from the vital signs section of the visit notes in the EMR. Of a random sample of 250 patients with unavailable BP, only 94 (37.6%) had BP values documented in other parts of the visit note. In 29 patients (11.6%) billing for HTN was done without adequate evidence that it was addressed at that visit. Control rates were highest for primary care providers where measurement and documentation of BP was a focus - Family Medicine 77% controlled, 1% unavailable; Primary Care Internal Medicine 71% controlled, 4% unavailable. A considerable proportion of patients in the other four provider groups did not have BP available from their last hypertension visit - Cardiology 59% controlled, 22% unavailable; Nephrology 38% controlled, 47% unavailable; Preventive Medicine 48% controlled, 39% unavailable; General Internal Medicine 41% controlled, 45% unavailable. Control rates were similar across provider groups when patients with unavailable BP were excluded: Family Medicine 78%, Primary Care 74%, Cardiology 75%, Nephrology 73%, Preventive Medicine 79%, and General Medicine 75%. Conclusions: Up to a quarter of HTN patients did not have properly documented BP in the EMR at their LHV. For those with measurements recorded, control rates were similar across primary care and specialty clinics, but measurement rates were higher for primary care practices. Use of the EMR facilitates efficient and granular assessment of the measurement process and control rates for HTN among various provider groups.

Background: Among patients (pts) with coronary artery disease (CAD) who are candidates for coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG), a reduced ejection fraction (EF) identifies a high-risk group. The profile of pre-operative, intra-operative and post-operative factors contributing to 30 day (d) mortality in pts with low EF undergoing CABG has not been well characterized. Methods: The STICH trial enrolled 2136 pts with CAD amenable to CABG with an LVEF < 35% who were treated with medical therapy (MED) alone, MED with CABG, or with MED plus CABG and surgical ventricular resconstruction (SVR). Multivariable logistic regression models utilizing extensive baseline, intra-operative and post-operative care variables were developed to determine factors associated with mortality at 30d in a landmark analysis among pts surviving the first 36 hours (h). Results: Among those enrolled, 1460 pts received CABG; 673 (46.1%) on pump, 160 (11.0%) off pump, 132 (9.0%) with a mitral valve procedure (MVR), 393 (26.9%) with SVR, and 102 (7.0%) received CABG with SVR and MVR. Mortality in the operating room (OR) was 0.3 %, within the first 36h was 1.0%, and at 30d was 5.1%. The rate of in-hospital acute myocardial infarction was 0.8%, stroke 1.6%, mediastinitis 1.7%, worsening renal insufficiency 8.4%, and return to OR was 6.9%. Inotropes were used in 43.6% and intra-aortic balloon pump in 18.6%. At 36h, 148 pts (10.2%) remained intubated. Among pts who survived to 36h, a robust multivariable model (Table, c-statistic 0.89) was developed to predict 30d mortality. A prolonged intubation time (>36h) was the strongest marker of 30d mortality (odds ratio 7.4, 95% CI 3.8, 14.5, p<0.0001). Conclusions: Among pts with ischemic heart failure, CABG can be performed with a low rate of complications and intra-operative mortality. Prolonged intubation time (>36h) after CABG is an integrated clincal marker that may serve to identify those pts with the least likelihood of survival to 30d.

Background: Prior studies suggest an association between naturally high circulating levels of CD34+ cells (CD34) and better outcomes following ischemic events. Pts in the treatment arm of the PreSERVE-AMI study were infused with all CD34 yielded from their bone marrow harvest, resulting in pts with naturally higher CD34 cell counts being infused with a higher cell dose. To determine whether selection bias may have influenced results, we performed an analysis of the relationship between BM CD34 content and outcomes in PreSERVE-AMI. Methods: PreSERVE-AMI is a Phase 2, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of autologous, BM derived CD34 (CLBS10) in pts with LV dysfunction (LVEF ≤48% by MRI) ≥4 days post-STEMI. All pts underwent mini BM harvest and were randomized 1:1 to intracoronary infusion of CD34 (minimum dose 10M±20% cells) or placebo (cell diluent). Primary safety endpoints included AEs, SAEs and MACE (CV mortality, HF hospitalization, reinfarction, revascularization). Secondary endpoints included LVEF change from baseline. Regression analyses were performed to assess the influence of BM CD34 content on outcomes. Results: 161 patients were randomized and received intracoronary infusion (Jan 2013-Dec 2014). Mean age was 57±10 and 82% were men. Mean follow-up time was 18 mo, and safety data are accruing. BM CD34 content was not associated with differences in baseline characteristics with the exception of diabetes prevalence being higher in those with higher BM CD34 count (p=0.03). In controls, regression analyses showed no association of BM CD34 content with rates of MACE (p=0.2), SAEs (p=0.4), or change in LVEF (p=0.9). However, in CD34 treated pts, there was a dose-dependent improvement in LV function (p=0.045) and dose-dependent trends in MACE and SAE reduction compared to controls. As previously reported SPECT perfusion improved to a similar degree in control and treated pts. Conclusions: These data suggest that intracoronary infusion of CD34 cells, rather than BM CD34 cell content, is responsible for the benefit observed in the CD34 treatment group. The finding of a dose-response relationship is an important advance for defining the CD34 as an active agent for tissue repair. Future studies will further define CD34 dosimetry.

Introduction . The addition of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) to the treatment options for patients with atherothrombotic (AT) coronary heart disease (CHD) has resulted in considerable debate regarding its overall clinical benefit. Although rates of “hard” clinical endpoints have been used as measures of both clinical outcome and disease burden, a comprehensive, clinically relevant measure of disease burden in the general population of patients undergoing PCI is lacking. Hypothesis . A comprehensive measure of AT clinical burden in patients undergoing PCI can be used to detect the qualitative and quantitative impact of PCI over time. Methods . Four distinct cohorts (Waves) of ~ 2,000 patients each participating in the NHLBI Dynamic Registry beginning in 1997 (Wave 1) and terminating in 2005 (Wave 4) and surviving to hospital discharge comprise the study population (n= 7,750). A composite clincally relevant measure of AT disease burden over the year following PCI was defined as: any death, myocardial infarction (MI), hospitalization for recurrent angina (A) or congestive heart failure (HF), stroke, any repeat PCI or coronary bypass surgery. Cumulative event rates, expressed as the presence of any of the above-cited components by one year, were calculated using Kaplan-Meier statistics. Comparison of rates across Waves was accomplished using Cochran- Mantel-Haenszel method. Results. see Table Exclusion of patients requiring PCI for restenosis did not substantially change the overall AT burden. Conclusion. There was a statistically significant decrease in AT disease burden over the time studied. However, the burden of disease in patients undergoing PCI remains substantial for 25% of patients. This measure of AT burden may be of clinical value in assessing the contribution of PCI to patient outcomes and strongly supports more comprehensive treatment strategies for patients following PCI. Component and composite rates at one year

Background: In the ACUITY Trial, patients (pts) with chronic renal insufficiency (CRI) had significantly higher rates of ischemic events and major bleeding compared to pts without CRI at 30 days. Bivalirudin (Biv) monotherapy provided similar protection from ischemic events but with significantly less bleeding compared to heparin + a GPIIb/IIIa inhibitor (Hep+GPI). The impact of a Biv alone strategy on one year mortality is unknown. Methods: Pts with moderate and high risk acute coronary syndromes (ACS) were randomized to Hep + GPI, Biv + GPI, or Biv monotherapy. CRI was defined as baseline creatinine clearance (CrCl) <60 mL/min. We evaluated the impact of CRI and antithrombotic strategy on composite ischemia (death, MI, or revascularization) and mortality at one year. Results: Of the pts enrolled, 12,933 had baseline CrCl data: 2468 (19.1%) pts had CrCl ≥60 mL/min and 10,465 (80.9%) pts had CrCl <60 mL/min. Rates of major bleeding at 30 days in pts with CRI were significantly lower with Biv alone vs Hep+GPI (6.2% vs 9.8%, p<0.01). Pts with CRI had higher mortality at one year compared to those without CRI (8.7% vs 3.0%, p<0.001). There was no difference in composite ischemia for pts who received Biv monotherapy vs Hep + GPI (23.0% vs 21.4%, p=0.10). One year mortality by antithrombin strategy is shown in the Figure . Conclusions: CRI in pts with ACS is associated with higher rates of one year mortality. In these high risk pts, Biv monotherapy improved early clinical outcomes compared to Hep + GPI by reducing major bleeding, and resulted in similar rates of one year mortality. Cumulative Mortality at One Year, Patients with CRI

Current guidelines recommend cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT-D) in appropriate patients undergoing ICD implantation. However, not all physicians who implant ICDs are trained to perform CRT-D. We examined the ICD Registry to assess whether use of CRT-D implantation varied by physician certification. We determined the certification of 2128 physicians who had submitted >=10 cases between April 2006 and June 2007. We excluded patients with a prior ICD, an epicardial lead, or aged ≤18 years, leaving 111,293 patients. Physicians were grouped into mutually exclusive categories reflecting highest current certification- Electrophysiology (EP), Cardiovascular Disease (CVD), Thoracic Surgery (TS), Internal Medicine (IM), Heart Rhythm Society alternative pathway (HRS), and Other. Patients were considered eligible for CRT-D if they met the following criteria: QRS duration >=120ms, LVEF ≪26>35%, and NYHA Class III-IV. We examined crude rates of CRT-D across physician categories and developed a logistic regression model to assess the association of physician certification and CRT-D implantation. Candidate variables included demographics, cardiac status, comorbidities, and physician volume. Odds ratios were converted to relative risks. 35,851 patients met all three eligibility criteria for CRT-D, and 28,932 (80.7%) had a CRT-D implanted. EP physicians implanted the majority of CRT-D (73.6%), with fewer CRT-D placed by CVD (20.6%), TS (0.9%), IM (0.8%), HRS (1.1%), or Other (3.1%). The crude rate of CRT-D implantation was highest among EP physicians and lower in all other categories: EP- 83.1%, CVD-75.8%, TS- 57.9%, IM- 76.5%, HRS- 77.1%, Other- 73.5% (p<0.001). In multivariable analysis, CVD and TS physicians were less likely to implant CRT-D in eligible patients compared with EP physicians (EP: Ref; CVD: RR 0.92 (0.90 – 0.94); TS: RR 0.76 (0.71– 0.85)). CRT-D rates were comparable for other physician groups (IM RR 0.95 (0.87–1.01); HRS: RR 0.97 (0.90 –1.02); Other RR 0.97 (0.93–1.00)). Among eligible patients, use of CRT-D varies by physician certification. Given the benefits of CRT-D, clinicians should consider referring eligible patients to physicians with familiarity and expertise in CRT-D implantation.