Search

Introduction: Pericardial effusion, a known complication to implantation of cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIED), may cause life-threatening cardiac tamponade. Limited knowledge is available about risk factors for clinically relevant procedural pericardial effusion. The aim is to identify the patient- and procedure-related risk factors associated with clinically relevant procedural pericardial effusion., Method: A nationwide observational cohort study based on data on 55 121 patients from the Danish Pacemaker Register between 2000 and 2018. We defined a clinically relevant procedural pericardial effusion related to the implantation if it occurred within 90 days after the primary CIED-procedure. Prespecified risk factors were analysed by multivariable logistic regression models to estimate the association with pericardial effusion., Results: There were 115 (0.21%) patients diagnosed with clinically relevant procedural pericardial effusion, with a median age of 75 years and 38.3% were females. Of these, 80.9% lead to a subsequent pericardiocentesis procedure. In adjusted logistic regression analysis, an increased risk of clinically relevant pericardial effusion was associated with female sex (OR:1.49 [95%CI: 1.03-2.16]), heart failure (OR:1.54 [95%CI: 1.06-2.23]), previous cardiac surgery (OR:1.63 [95%CI: 1.05-2.55]), CRT-device (OR:2.05 [95%CI: 1.23-3.41]), tertiary-centres (OR:1.8 [95%CI: 1.18-2.73]), increased procedural volume per year (>1000) (OR:1.85 [95%CI: 1.03-3.30]), indication of device-implantation (atrioventricular block) (OR:2.37 [95CI: 1.45-3.87]), and increasing number of leads implanted (two leads (OR:2.39 [95%CI: 1.43-4.00]), three leads (OR:4.77 [95%CI: 2.50-9.10]))., Conclusion: Clinically relevant procedural pericardial effusion is a rare complication after CIED-implantation in Denmark. This study reveals important patient- and procedure-related risk factors associated with clinically relevant procedural pericardial effusion., (© 2024 Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Background: This study investigated excess risk in patients with heart failure with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (HFrEF) with or without elevated levels of NT-proBNP (N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide)., Methods: Patients with HFrEF from the NorthStar cohort (n = 1120) were matched on age, sex, and presence of AF (atrial fibrillation/flutter) to five controls without HFrEF from The Danish National Patient Registries. Patients were compared with controls before and after stratification according to baseline NT-proBNP levels, with cutoffs defined as

Objective: It remains unknown whether patient socioeconomic factors affect interventions and survival after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA), and whether a socioeconomic effect on bystander interventions affects survival. Therefore, this study examined patient socioeconomic disparities in prehospital factors and survival., Methods: From the Danish Cardiac Arrest Registry, patients with OHCA ≥30 years were identified, 2001-2014, and divided into quartiles of household income (highest, high, low, lowest). Associations between income and bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) and 30-day survival with bystander CPR as mediator were analysed by logistic regression and mediation analysis in private witnessed, public witnessed, private unwitnessed and public unwitnessed arrests, adjusted for confounders., Results: We included 21 480 patients. Highest income patients were younger, had higher education and were less comorbid relative to lowest income patients. They had higher odds for bystander CPR with the biggest difference in private unwitnessed arrests (OR 1.74, 95% CI 1.47 to 2.05). For 30-day survival, the biggest differences were in public witnessed arrests with 26.0% (95% CI 22.4% to 29.7%) higher survival in highest income compared with lowest income patients. Had bystander CPR been the same for lowest income as for highest income patients, then survival would be 25.3% (95% CI 21.5% to 29.0%) higher in highest income compared with lowest income patients, resulting in elimination of 0.79% (95% CI 0.08% to 1.50%) of the income disparity in survival. Similar trends but smaller were observed in low and high-income patients, the other three subgroups and with education instead of income. From 2002 to 2014, increases were observed in both CPR and survival in all income groups., Conclusion: Overall, lower socioeconomic status was associated with poorer prehospital factors and survival after OHCA that was not explained by patient or cardiac arrest-related factors., Competing Interests: Competing interests: LK has received lecture fees from Sanofi and Novartis., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Recent randomised clinical trials have suggested prognostic benefits of catheter ablation in highly selected patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and heart failure (HF)., Objectives: This study sought to identify the treatment effect associated with catheter ablation in a broad population of patients with AF and HF., Methods: Through nationwide administrative registers in Denmark, we estimated the 2-year average treatment effect (ATE) of catheter ablation for AF on a composite endpoint of HF readmission, stroke and all-cause mortality at 1-year and 5-year landmark analyses. The primary cohort was patients with AF before HF, and the second cohort of patients with HF before AF., Results: A total of 13 756 patients were included with 9904 patients in the primary cohort, and 3852 in the secondary. An ATE (95% CI) reduction of the composite endpoint of 7.0% (4.5% to 9.5%) was observed in the primary cohort and 11.8% (6.0% to 17.6%) in the secondary in the 1-year landmark analysis with a reduction in all-cause mortality of 5.8% (3.7%-7.8%) and 6.3% (0.9%-11.7%), respectively. At the 5-year landmark, catheter ablation was associated with reductions in the composite endpoint and all-cause mortality in the primary (4.7% (2.3% to 7.2%), and 3.6% (1.0% to 6.3%), respectively), but not in the secondary cohort., Conclusions: Ablation was associated with decreased risk of HF readmission, stroke and all-cause mortality in patients with AF and HF. The effect is most substantial in patients with AF before HF and with catheter ablation after 1 year from the diagnosis of both conditions., Competing Interests: Competing interests: FG is an advisor for Abbott, Carmat; Corvia (unpaid) speaker: Novartis, Astra, Orion Pharma; and investigator for Alnylam., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Objective: To prospectively validate the CT-Valve score, a new risk score designed to identify patients with valvular heart disease at a low risk of coronary artery disease (CAD) who could benefit from multislice CT (MSCT) first instead of coronary angiography (CAG)., Methods: This was a prospective cohort study of patients referred for valve surgery in the Capital Region of Denmark and Odense University Hospital from the 1 February 2015 to the 1 February 2017. MSCT was implemented for patients with a CT-Valve score ≤7 at the referring physician's discretion. Patients with a history of CAD or chronic kidney disease were excluded. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients needing reevaluation with CAG after MSCT and risk of CAD among the patients determined to be low to intermediate risk., Results: In total, 1149 patients were included. The median score was 9 (IQR 3) and 339 (30%) had a score ≤7. MSCT was used for 117 patients. Of these 29 (25%) were reevaluated and 9 (7.7%) had CAD. Of the 222 patients with a score ≤7 that did not receive an MSCT, 14 (6%) had significant CAD. The estimated total cost of evaluation among patients with a score ≤7 before implementation was €132 093 compared with €79 073 after, a 40% reduction. Similarly, estimated total radiation before and after was 608 mSv and 362 mSv, a 41% reduction. Follow-up at a median of 32 months (18-48) showed no ischaemic events for patients receiving only MSCT., Conclusion: The CT-Valve score is a valid method for determining risk of CAD among patients with valvular heart disease. Using a score ≤7 as a cut-off for the use of MSCT is safe and cost-effective., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Significant valve regurgitation is common in patients surviving native valve infective endocarditis (IE), however the associated risk of heart failure (HF) subsequent to hospital discharge after IE is sparsely described., Methods: We linked data from the East Danish Endocarditis Registry with administrative registries from 2002 to 2016 and included patients treated medically for IE who were discharged alive. Left-sided valve regurgitation was assessed by echocardiography at IE discharge and examined for longitudinal risk of HF. Multivariable adjusted Cox analysis was used to assess the associated risk of HF in patients with regurgitation (moderate or severe) compared with patients without regurgitation., Results: We included 192 patients, 87 patients with regurgitation at discharge (30 with aortic regurgitation and 57 with mitral regurgitation) and 105 patients without. The cumulative risk of HF at 5 years of follow-up was 28.7% in patients with regurgitation at IE discharge and 12.4% in patients without regurgitation; the corresponding multivariable adjusted HR was 3.53 (95% CI 1.72 to 7.25). We identified an increased associated risk of HF for patients with aortic regurgitation (HR=2.91, 95% CI 1.14 to 7.43) and mitral regurgitation (HR=3.95, 95% CI 1.80 to 8.67) compared with patients without regurgitation. During follow-up, 21.9% and 5.7% underwent left-sided valve surgery among patients with and without regurgitation., Conclusion: In patients surviving IE, treated medically, we observed that severe or moderate left-sided native valve regurgitation was associated with a significantly higher risk of HF compared with patients without regurgitation at IE discharge. Close monitoring of these patients is needed to initiate surgery timely., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Objective: Coronary artery disease (CAD) is frequent in patients with newly diagnosed heart failure (HF). Multislice CT (MSCT) is a non-invasive alternative to coronary angiography (CAG) suggested for patients with a low-to-intermediate risk of CAD. No established definition of such patients exists. Our purpose was to develop a simple score to identify as large a group as possible with a suitable pretest risk of CAD., Methods: Retrospective study of patients in Denmark undergoing CAG due to newly diagnosed HF from 2010 to 2014. All Danish patients were registered in two databases according to geographical location. We used data from one registry and multiple logistic regression with backwards elimination to find predictors of CAD and used the derived OR to develop a clinical risk score called the CT-HF score, which was subsequently validated in the other database., Results: The main cohort consisted of 2171 patients and the validation cohort consisted of 2795 patients with 24% and 27% of patients having significant CAD, respectively. Among significant predictor, the strongest was extracardiac arteriopathy (OR 2.84). Other significant factors were male sex, smoking, hyperlipidaemia, diabetes mellitus, angina and age. A proposed cut-off of 9 points identified 61% of patients with a 15% risk of having CAD, resulting in an estimated savings of 15% of the cost and 21% of the radiation., Conclusions: A simple score based on clinical risk factors could identify HF patients with a low risk of CAD; these patients may have benefitted from MSCT as a gatekeeper for CAG., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: According to guidelines, initiation of pharmacological thromboprophylaxis after total knee or hip replacement is recommended and associated with improved patient outcomes. However, data on how these recommendations are followed in clinical practice are sparse., Methods: All patients undergoing first-time total knee or hip replacement in Denmark 2008-2011 were identified. By cross-referencing Danish nationwide registries, quantitative use of anticoagulants administered orally and subcutaneously post-discharge was assessed by number of claimed prescriptions after surgery. Logistic regression analysis was used to identify factors associated with initiation of prophylaxis., Results: A total of 50,389 patients were included in the study (median age 69, inter-quartile range 62-76). Novel oral anticoagulants were initiated in 14.7 % of the patients and heparins/fondaparinux in 2.3 % of the patients. The use of anticoagulants increased from 6.3 % in 2008 to 30.0 % of patients in 2011. Among patients initiating prophylaxis with a novel oral anticoagulant post-discharge, almost all were treated according to guidelines in terms of treatment duration. Factors significantly associated with an increased chance of prophylaxis among total hip replacement patients were: age (per 10-year increments) and female gender., Conclusions: Use of pharmacological thromboprophylaxis after total knee or hip replacement was low, but increasing during the study period. This is probably due to increased availability of novel oral anticoagulants. Further initiatives to increase guideline recommended use of prophylactic anticoagulation after orthopaedic surgery are warranted.