Citations

Background: Papillary Muscle (PM) related ventricular arrhythmia ablation is associated with lower acute success and suboptimal long-term outcomes due to complex anatomy, variable arrhythmogenic sites and dynamic exit points. Objective: To evaluate clinical and procedural outcomes of patients undergoing PM vs non-PM ablation. Methods: A retrospective analysis of adults (≥18 years) undergoing PVC ablation at Mayo Clinic (2019–2024) matched PM PVC ablations to controls (1:2) using propensity scoring based on age, sex, comorbidities and baseline LVEF. Chi-square and t-tests compared baseline and procedural characteristics. Logistic regression estimated odds ratios for immediate procedural success, PVC burden reduction and LVEF improvement at 3 months. Results: Of the 720 ablations, 392 cases were included after propensity matching: 132 PM and 260 non-PM. Patients in the PM group exhibited higher rates of complicated diabetes (9.8% vs 4.6%, p =0.045) and prior MI (18.2% vs 9.2%, p =0.011). Preprocedural ECG PVCs in the PM group showed a shorter intrinsicoid deflection (89.1 ± 35.0 msec vs 100.7 ± 24.3 msec, p <0.001) and longer coupling intervals (532.7 ± 100.3 vs 512.2 ± 81.4 msec, p =0.048).Moderate-to-severe MR was more prevalent in the PM group (17.4% vs 10.0%, p =0.036). Intraoperatively, the PM group had higher total energy delivery times (1939 ± 1336 sec vs 1227 ± 1033 sec, p <0.001) and more frequent cryoablation use (46.2% vs 7.3%, p <0.001). During post-ablation testing, non-clinical PVC was inducible in 39.5% of the cases in PM group compared to 25.7% in non-PM group ( p =0.005). More patients in the PM group were discharged on atleast one antiarrhythmic drug (AAD)(35.9% vs 18.5%, p <0.001) and AAD use persisted at 3 months (31.3% vs 18.4%, p =0.004). Outcomes were similar between groups, with no significant differences observed in immediate ablation success (aOR 0.64, p = 0.063, CI = 0.40-1.03), or >5% improvement in LVEF (aOR 0.76, p = 0.29) and PVC burden reduction (aOR 0.93, p = 0.81) at 3 months follow up. Conclusion: Patients undergoing PM ablation exhibited higher baseline rates of comorbidities. Intraoperatively they required greater energy delivery times, and an increased use of cryoablation. Postoperatively, a larger proportion of PM ablation patients required antiarrhythmic drug therapy. Despite these complexities, PM ablation showed no significant differences in PVC burden reduction, LVEF improvement, or procedural success compared to non-PM ablation.

Introduction: Older age and multimorbidity observed in individuals with dementia may impact both the care they receive and their outcomes in the setting of acute coronary syndrome (ACS). We conducted an analysis of ACS hospitalizations in the US to examine whether disparities exist between patients with and without dementia in percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) use and ACS-related outcomes after accounting for age and comorbidities. Methods: We used the Nationwide Readmissions Database 2021 to identify adults hospitalized with a primary diagnosis of ACS, including STEMI and NSTEMI. Propensity scores for dementia were calculated using 33 baseline characteristics, including age, sex, insurance, income, hospital characteristics, Charlson comorbidity index, and other relevant comorbidities. We performed 1:1 nearest-neighbor matching with a caliper of 0.2 standard deviations. After matching, we compare the following outcomes of people with and without dementia: receipt of PCI, mechanical complications of ACS, cardiogenic shock, mechanical circulatory support, inpatient mortality, length of stay, and hospitalization cost, and reported odds ratios or mean difference, 95% confidence interval, p-value. Survey weights were applied to ensure national representativeness. Results: Among 295,396 patients hospitalized with ACS, 7,143 had dementia. After matching, 7,142 patients with and without dementia were identified for analysis ( Figure 1 ). Covariate balance was achieved (all standardized mean differences <.1). Patients with dementia were 28% less likely to undergo PCI (0.72 [0.67–0.77], p<.001) and 78% more likely to develop cardiogenic shock (1.76 [1.58–1.95], p<.001), 82% more likely to require mechanical circulatory support (1.82 [1.61–2.05], p<.001), and 16% more likely to die during hospitalization (1.16 [1.04–1.30], p<.01) ( Figure 2 ). No significant difference was observed in mechanical complications of ACS (0.89 [0.33–2.33], p=.81). Patients with dementia had longer hospital stays (9.27 vs. 5.89 days; mean difference 3.38 [3.06-3.7] days, p<.001) and higher hospitalization costs ($182,649 vs. $130,233; mean difference $52,416 [$44,618- $60,215], p<.001). Conclusion: In this analysis of US hospitalizations for ACS, dementia was independently associated with lower PCI rates and worse ACS-related outcomes despite accounting for age and comorbidities. Further research is needed to understand and address these inequities in ACS management in patients with dementia.

Introduction: Living in an area with high Area Deprivation Index (ADI) is linked to worse cardiovascular disease (CVD) outcomes. However, the association of ADI with type 2 diabetes (T2D), a major CVD risk factor, is incompletely described. This knowledge may guide primary CVD prevention. Method: Rochester Epidemiology Project is a medical record linkage system of persons in southeast Minnesota and southwest Wisconsin. We identified 253,890 persons (aged 4–98 yrs on July 1, 2015) in 9 counties with >90% population coverage. ADI scores, from 2015 home addresses, were grouped into quartiles of low (Q1) to high (Q4) deprivation. We excluded persons with type 1 diabetes (T1D) or history of T2D and identified new T2D cases (2015-2020) using ICD codes, HbA1c and medications. We examined the association between ADI quartile and risk of incident T2D using Cox regression with persons right censored at death, T2D, T1D or last visit. Models were adjusted for age and gender, and reported adjusted hazard ratios (aHR [95% confidence interval]). Results: Age, gender, and race statistically differed across ADI quartiles (Table). Age × ADI interaction was significant ( P <.001). T2D incidence ranged from 6.3 (Q1) to 9.0 (Q4) per 1000 person-years ( P <.001). Women vs. men/non-binary persons (combined due to limited non-binary persons) had 30% lower risk of incident T2D (aHR 0.70 [0.67–0.72]). Risk of incident T2D was higher in persons from higher ADI areas. At median age of 48.6 yrs, the risk was 30% higher in Q2 (aHR 1.3 [1.22–1.38]), 38% higher in Q3 (aHR 1.38 [1.30–1.47]) and 53% higher in Q4 (aHR 1.53 [1.43–1.62]) vs. Q1. Higher ADI was associated with higher incident T2D in younger persons, with risk attenuation with increasing age (Figure). Conclusion: In this population cohort, persons, particularly of younger age, living in more deprived areas had a higher risk of incident T2D. ADI may help identify areas for targeted T2D screening, with implications for CVD screening and prevention.

Background: The prevalence of type 2 diabetes (T2D) is increasing in Hispanic or Latino adults. The American Diabetes Association (ADA) score to identify current risk of T2D was developed with limited Hispanic or Latino representation. Therefore, we sought to validate the ADA score in a cohort of Hispanic or Latino adults. Methods: At enrollment in the Sangre Por Salud Biobank, 3,625 Hispanic or Latino adults from Phoenix, Arizona completed a baseline questionnaire. Current risk of undiagnosed T2D was based on non-laboratory risk factors and ADA score ≥5 (Table). Participants also completed T2D screening (ie, fasting glucose, 2-hour oral glucose tolerance test, and/or hemoglobin A1c). Undiagnosed T2D was based on 'no self-reported T2D but meeting T2D diagnostic’ criteria. Multivariable logistic regression analyzed associations of ADA risk factors and undiagnosed T2D, and model performance was based on sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV). Results: At enrollment, 7.3% of participants had undiagnosed T2D (n=265/3,625). In multivariable analysis, most risk factors described for the ADA score were significantly associated with T2D, except for sex, which showed no association. ADA score ≥5 had sensitivity 50%, specificity 79%, PPV 18%, and NPV 95%. However, ADA score ≥4 had sensitivity 72%, specificity 61%, PPV 14%, and NPV 96%. ADA score ≥4 vs ≥5 identified 22% (n=59) additional cases of undiagnosed T2D. Furthermore, using the revised definition for elevated blood pressure (>120/80 mmHg) vs ≥140/90 mmHg (current ADA score) further improved the ADA score ≥4 (sensitivity 81%; specificity 52%). Other scores had lower performance using both hypertension definitions. Conclusion: In Hispanic or Latino adults, a lower ADA score than currently recommended identified additional cases of undiagnosed T2D. The ADA score requires validation and recalibration, including for the updated hypertension guidelines.