Person:

Bhatt, Deepak

Background: An analysis of the changes in the clinical and demographic characteristics of patients with acute myocardial infarction could identify successes and failures of risk factor identification and treatment of patients at increased risk for cardiovascular events. Methods and results: We reviewed data collected from 138 122 patients with acute myocardial infarction admitted from 2003 to 2008 to hospitals participating in the American Heart Association Get With The Guidelines Coronary Artery Disease program. Clinical, demographic, and laboratory characteristics were analyzed for each year stratified on the electrocardiogram at presentation. Patients with non–ST-segment–elevation myocardial infarction were older, more likely to be women, and more likely to have hypertension, diabetes mellitus, and a history of past cardiovascular disease than were patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction. In the overall patient sample, significant trends were observed of an increase over time in the proportions of non–ST-segment–elevation myocardial infarction, patient age of 45 to 65 years, obesity, and female sex. The prevalence of diabetes mellitus decreased over time, whereas the prevalences of hypertension and smoking were substantial and unchanging. The prevalence of “low” high-density lipoprotein increased over time, whereas that of “high” low-density lipoprotein decreased. Stratum-specific univariate analysis revealed quantitative and qualitative differences between strata in time trends for numerous demographic, clinical, and biochemical measures. On multivariable analysis, there was concordance between strata with regard to the increase in prevalence of patients 45 to 65 years of age, obesity, and “low” high-density lipoprotein and the decrease in prevalence of “high” low-density lipoprotein. However, changes in trends in age distribution, sex ratio, and prevalence of smokers and the magnitude of change in diabetes mellitus prevalence differed between strata. Conclusions: There were notable differences in risk factors and patient characteristics among patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction and those with non–ST-segment–elevation myocardial infarction. The increasing prevalence of dysmetabolic markers in a growing proportion of patients with acute myocardial infarction suggests further opportunities for risk factor modification.

Residual cardiovascular risk persists despite statins, yet outcome studies of lipid‐targeted therapies beyond low‐density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL‐C) have not demonstrated added benefit. Triglyceride elevation is an independent risk factor for cardiovascular events. High‐dose eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) reduces triglyceride‐rich lipoproteins without raising LDL‐C. Omega‐3s have postulated pleiotropic cardioprotective benefits beyond triglyceride‐lowering. To date, no large, multinational, randomized clinical trial has proved that lowering triglycerides on top of statin therapy improves cardiovascular outcomes. The Reduction of Cardiovascular Events with Icosapent Ethyl–Intervention Trial (REDUCE‐IT; NCT01492361) is a phase 3b randomized, double‐blinded, placebo‐controlled trial of icosapent ethyl, a highly purified ethyl ester of EPA, vs placebo. The main objective is to evaluate whether treatment with icosapent ethyl reduces ischemic events in statin‐treated patients with high triglycerides at elevated cardiovascular risk. REDUCE‐IT enrolled men or women age ≥45 years with established cardiovascular disease or age ≥50 years with diabetes mellitus and 1 additional risk factor. Randomization required fasting triglycerides ≥150 mg/dL and <500 mg/dL and LDL‐C >40 mg/dL and ≤100 mg/dL with stable statin (± ezetimibe) ≥4 weeks prior to qualifying measurements. The primary endpoint is a composite of cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, coronary revascularization, or unstable angina. The key secondary endpoint is the composite of cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke. Several secondary, tertiary, and exploratory endpoints will be assessed. Approximately 8000 patients have been randomized at approximately 470 centers worldwide. Follow‐up will continue in this event‐driven trial until approximately 1612 adjudicated primary‐efficacy endpoint events have occurred.

Antithrombotic management of patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) undergoing coronary stenting is complicated by the need for anticoagulant therapy for stroke prevention and dual antiplatelet therapy for prevention of stent thrombosis and coronary events. Triple antithrombotic therapy, typically comprising warfarin, aspirin, and clopidogrel, is associated with a high risk of bleeding. A modest‐sized trial of oral anticoagulation with warfarin and clopidogrel without aspirin showed improvements in both bleeding and thrombotic events compared with triple therapy, but large trials are lacking. The RE‐DUAL PCI trial (NCT 02164864) is a phase 3b, a strategy of prospective, randomized, open‐label, blinded‐endpoint trial. The main objective is to evaluate dual antithrombotic therapy with dabigatran etexilate (110 or 150 mg twice daily) and a P2Y12 inhibtor (either clopidogrel or ticagrelor) compared with triple antithrombotic therapy with warfarin, a P2Y12 inhibtor (either clopidogrel or ticagrelor, and low‐dose aspirin (for 1 or 3 months, depending on stent type) in nonvalvular AF patients who have undergone percutaneous coronary intervention with stenting. The primary endpoint is time to first International Society of Thrombosis and Hemostasis major bleeding event or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding event. Secondary endpoints are the composite of all cause death or thrombotic events (myocardial infarction, or stroke/systemic embolism) and unplanned revascularization; death or thrombotic events; individual outcome events; death, myocardial infarction, or stroke; and unplanned revascularization. A hierarchical procedure for multiple testing will be used. The plan is to randomize ∼ 2500 patients at approximately 550 centers worldwide to try to identify new treatment strategies for this patient population.

Background— The Cangrelor Versus Standard Therapy to Achieve Optimal Management of Platelet Inhibition (CHAMPION) PHOENIX trial demonstrated superiority of cangrelor in reducing ischemic events at 48 hours in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention compared with clopidogrel. Methods and Results— We analyzed all patients included in the modified intention-to-treat analysis in US (n=4097; 37.4%) and non-US subgroups (n=6845; 62.6%). The US cohort was older, had a higher burden of cardiovascular risk factors, and had more frequently undergone prior cardiovascular procedures. US patients more frequently underwent percutaneous coronary intervention for stable angina (77.9% versus 46.2%). Almost all US patients (99.1%) received clopidogrel loading doses of 600 mg, whereas 40.5% of non-US patients received 300 mg. Bivalirudin was more frequently used in US patients (56.7% versus 2.9%). At 48 hours, rates of the primary composite end point were comparable in the US and non-US cohorts (5.5% versus 5.2%; P=0.53). Cangrelor reduced rates of the primary composite end point compared with clopidogrel in US (4.5% versus 6.4%; odds ratio 0.70 [95% confidence interval 0.53–0.92]) and in non-US patients (4.8% versus 5.6%; odds ratio 0.85 [95% confidence interval 0.69–1.05]; interaction P=0.26). Similarly, rates of the key secondary end point, stent thrombosis, were reduced by cangrelor in both regions. Rates of Global Use of Strategies to Open Occluded Arteries (GUSTO)–defined severe bleeding were low and not significantly increased by cangrelor in either region. Conclusions— Despite broad differences in clinical profiles and indications for percutaneous coronary intervention by region in a large global cardiovascular clinical trial, cangrelor consistently reduced rates of ischemic end points compared with clopidogrel without an excess in severe bleeding in both the US and non-US subgroups. Clinical Trial Registration— URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01156571.

Objective: To quantify the overall effects of bariatric surgery compared with non-surgical treatment for obesity. Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis based on a random effects model. Data sources Searches of Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Library from their inception to December 2012 regardless of language or publication status. Eligibility criteria Eligible studies were randomised controlled trials with ≥6 months of follow-up that included individuals with a body mass index ≥30, compared current bariatric surgery techniques with non-surgical treatment, and reported on body weight, cardiovascular risk factors, quality of life, or adverse events. Results: The meta-analysis included 11 studies with 796 individuals (range of mean body mass index at baseline 30-52). Individuals allocated to bariatric surgery lost more body weight (mean difference −26 kg (95% confidence interval −31 to −21)) compared with non-surgical treatment, had a higher remission rate of type 2 diabetes (relative risk 22.1 (3.2 to 154.3) in a complete case analysis; 5.3 (1.8 to 15.8) in a conservative analysis assuming diabetes remission in all non-surgically treated individuals with missing data) and metabolic syndrome (relative risk 2.4 (1.6 to 3.6) in complete case analysis; 1.5 (0.9 to 2.3) in conservative analysis), greater improvements in quality of life and reductions in medicine use (no pooled data). Plasma triglyceride concentrations decreased more (mean difference −0.7 mmol/L (−1.0 to −0.4) and high density lipoprotein cholesterol concentrations increased more (mean difference 0.21 mmol/L (0.1 to 0.3)). Changes in blood pressure and total or low density lipoprotein cholesterol concentrations were not significantly different. There were no cardiovascular events or deaths reported after bariatric surgery. The most common adverse events after bariatric surgery were iron deficiency anaemia (15% of individuals undergoing malabsorptive bariatric surgery) and reoperations (8%). Conclusions: Compared with non-surgical treatment of obesity, bariatric surgery leads to greater body weight loss and higher remission rates of type 2 diabetes and metabolic syndrome. However, results are limited to two years of follow-up and based on a small number of studies and individuals. Systematic review registration PROSPERO CRD42012003317 (www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO).

Objective To examine the association between warfarin treatment and longitudinal outcomes after ischemic stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation in community practice. Design: Observational study. Setting: Hospitals (n=1487) participating in the Get With The Guidelines (GWTG)-Stroke program in the United States, from 2009 to 2011. Participants: 12 552 warfarin naive atrial fibrillation patients admitted to hospital for ischemic stroke and treated with warfarin compared with no oral anticoagulant at discharge, linked to Medicare claims for longitudinal outcomes. Main outcome measures Major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) and home time, a patient centered outcomes measure defined as the total number of days free from institutional care after discharge. A propensity score inverse probability weighting method was used to account for all differences in observed characteristics between treatment groups. Results: Among 12 552 survivors of stroke, 11 039 (88%) were treated with warfarin at discharge. Warfarin treated patients were slightly younger and less likely to have a history of previous stroke or coronary artery disease but had similar severity of stroke as measured by the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale. Relative to those not treated, patients treated with warfarin had more days at home (as opposed to institutional care) during the two years after discharge (adjusted home time difference 47.6 days, 99% confidence interval 26.9 to 68.2). Patients discharged on warfarin treatment also had a reduced risk of MACE (adjusted hazard ratio 0.87, 99% confidence interval 0.78 to 0.98), all cause mortality (0.72, 0.63 to 0.84), and recurrent ischemic stroke (0.63, 0.48 to 0.83). These differences were consistent among clinically relevant subgroups by age, sex, stroke severity, and history of previous coronary artery disease and stroke. Conclusions: Among ischemic stroke patients with atrial fibrillation, warfarin treatment was associated with improved long term clinical outcomes and more days at home. Clinical trial registration Clinical trials NCT02146274.

Background: Cilostazol overcomes high on-treatment platelet reactivity (HTPR) and reduces adverse cardiovascular (CV) outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). However, the role for triple antiplatelet therapy (TAPT) with cilostazol in addition to aspirin and clopidogrel after PCI is not well defined. Methods: We conducted a MEDLINE/EMBASE/CENTRAL search for randomised trials, until May 2014, evaluating TAPT compared with dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) of aspirin and clopidogrel alone in patients undergoing PCI and reporting platelet reactivity and/or CV outcomes. The primary platelet reactivity outcome was differences in platelet reactivity unit (PRU) with secondary outcomes of %platelet inhibition and rate of HTPR. The primary CV outcome was major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), with secondary outcomes of death, cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis (ST), target lesion revascularisation (TLR) and target vessel revascularisation (TVR) as well as safety outcomes of bleeding and drug discontinuations. Results: In 17 trials that evaluated platelet reactivity outcomes, the mean PRU value was 47.73 units lower with TAPT versus DAPT (95% CI −61.41 to −34.04, p<0.0001; mean PRU 182.90 vs 232.65). TAPT also increased platelet inhibition by 12.71% (95% CI 10.76 to 14.67, p<0.0001), and led to a 60% reduction in the risk of HTPR (relative risk=0.40; 95% CI 0.30 to 0.53) compared with DAPT. Moreover, among the 34 trials that evaluated CV outcomes, TAPT reduced the risk of MACE (incident rate ratio (IRR)=0.68; 95% CI 0.60 to 0.78), TLR (IRR=0.57; 95% CI 0.44 to 0.73), TVR (IRR=0.69; 95% CI 0.59 to 0.81) and ST (IRR=0.63; 95% CI 0.40 to 0.98) with no difference for other outcomes including bleeding, even in trials using drug-eluting stents. Drug discontinuation due to adverse effects was, however, higher with TAPT vs DAPT (IRR=1.59; 95% CI 1.32 to 1.91). Conclusions: In patients undergoing PCI, addition of cilostazol to DAPT results in decreased platelet reactivity and a significant reduction in CV outcomes including ST, even in the drug-eluting stent era.

Background: Relatively little is known about the quality of care and outcomes for hospitalized ischemic stroke patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). We examined quality of care and in‐hospital prognoses among patients with CKD in the Get With The Guidelines–Stroke (GWTG‐Stroke) program Methods and Results: We analyzed 679 827 patients hospitalized with ischemic stroke from 1564 US centers participating in the GWTG‐Stroke program between January 2009 and December 2012. Use of 7 predefined ischemic stroke performance measures, composite “defect‐free” care compliance, and in‐hospital mortality were examined based on glomerular filtration rate (GFR) categorized as a dichotomous (+CKD as <60) or rank‐ordered variable: normal (≥90), mild (≥60 to <90), moderate (≥30 to <60), severe (≥15 to <30), and kidney failure (<15 or dialysis). There were 236 662 (35%) ischemic stroke patients with CKD. Patients with severe renal dysfunction or failure were significantly less likely to receive guideline‐based therapies. Compared with patients with normal kidney function (≥90), those with CKD (adjusted OR 0.91 [95% CI: 0.89 to 0.92]), moderate dysfunction (adjusted OR 0.94 [95% CI: 0.92 to 0.97]), severe dysfunction (adjusted OR 0.80 [95% CI: 0.77 to 0.84]), or failure (adjusted OR 0.72 [95% CI: 0.68 to 0.0.76]), were less likely to receive 100% defect‐free care measure compliance. Inpatient mortality was higher for patients with CKD (adjusted odds ratio 1.44 [95% CI: 1.40 to 1.47]), and progressively rose with more severe renal dysfunction. Conclusions: Despite higher in‐hospital mortality rates, ischemic stroke patients with CKD, especially those with greater severity of renal dysfunction, were less likely to receive important guideline‐recommended therapies.

Objectives: To examine the effectiveness of primary implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) in elderly patients receiving the device during a hospital admission for exacerbation of heart failure or other acute co-morbidities, with an emphasis on adjustment for early mortality and other factors reflecting healthy candidate bias rather than the effect of the ICD. Design: Retrospective cohort study. Setting: Linked data from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services and American College of Cardiology-National Cardiovascular Data Registry ICD registry, nationwide heart failure registry, and Medicare claims data 2004-09. Population 23 111 patients aged ≥66 who were admitted to hospital for exacerbation of heart failure or other acute co-morbidities and eligible for primary ICDs. Main outcome measures All cause mortality and sudden cardiac death. Latency analyses with Cox regression were used to derive crude hazard ratios and hazard ratios adjusted for high dimension propensity score for outcomes after 180 days from index implantation or discharge. Results Patients who received an ICD during a hospital admission had lower crude mortality risk than patients who did not receive an ICD (40% v 60% at three years); however, with conditioning on 180 day survival and with adjustment for high dimension propensity score, the apparent benefit with ICD was no longer evident for sudden cardiac death (adjusted hazard ratio 0.95, 95% confidence interval 0.78 to 1.17) and had a diminished impact on total mortality (0.91, 0.82 to 1.00). There were trends towards a benefit with ICD in reducing mortality or sudden cardiac death in patients who had had a myocardial infarction more than 40 days previously, left bundle branch block, or low serum B type natriuretic peptide; however, these trends did not reach significance. Conclusion After adjustment for healthy candidate bias and confounding, the benefits of primary ICD therapy seen in pivotal trials were not apparent in patients aged 66 or over who received ICDs during a hospital admission for exacerbation of heart failure or other acute co-morbidities. Future research is warranted to further identify subgroups of elderly patients who are more likely to benefit from ICDs. Recognition of those patients whose dominant risk factors are from decompensated heart failure and non-cardiac co-morbidities will allow better focus on ICDs in those patients for whom the device offers the most benefit and provides meaningful prolonging of life.

Background: Hydralazine‐isosorbide dinitrate (H‐ISDN) therapy is recommended for African American patients with moderate to severe heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (<40%) (HFrEF), but use, temporal trends, and clinical characteristics associated with H‐ISDN therapy in clinical practice are unknown. Methods and Results: An observational analysis of 54 622 patients admitted with HFrEF and discharged home from 207 hospitals participating in the Get With The Guidelines–Heart Failure registry from April 2008 to March 2012 was conducted to assess prescription, trends, and predictors of use of H‐ISDN among eligible patients. Among 11 185 African American patients eligible for H‐ISDN therapy, only 2500 (22.4%) received H‐ISDN therapy at discharge. In the overall eligible population, 5115 of 43 498 (12.6%) received H‐ISDN at discharge. Treatment rates increased over the study period from 16% to 24% among African Americans and from 10% to 13% among the entire HFrEF population. In a multivariable model, factors associated with H‐ISDN use among the entire cohort included younger age; male sex; African American/Hispanic ethnicity; and history of diabetes, hypertension, anemia, renal insufficiency, higher systolic blood pressure, and lower heart rate. In African American patients, these factors were similar; in addition, being uninsured was associated with lower use. Conclusions: Overall, few potentially eligible patients with HFrEF are treated with H‐ISDN, and among African‐Americans fewer than one‐fourth of eligible patients received guideline‐recommended H‐ISDN therapy. Improved ways to facilitate use of H‐ISDN therapy in African American patients with HFrEF are needed.