Search

Aims: We analyzed the impact of frailty on readmission rates for ST-elevated myocardial infarctions (STEMIs) and the utilization of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in STEMI admissions., Methods and Results: The 2016-2019 Nationwide Readmission Database was analyzed for patients admitted with an acute STEMI. Patients were categorized by frailty risk and analyzed for 30-day readmission risk after acute STEMIs, PCI utilization and outcomes, and healthcare resource utilization. Qualifying index admissions were found in 584,918 visits. Low risk frailty was noted in 78.20%, intermediate risk in 20.67%, and high risk in 1.14% of admissions. Thirty-day readmissions occurred in 7.74% of index admissions, increasing with frailty (p < 0.001). Readmission risk increased with frailty, 1.37 times with intermediate and 1.21 times with high-risk frailty. PCI was performed in 86.40% of low-risk, 66.03% of intermediate-risk, and 58.90% of high-risk patients (p < 0.001). Intermediate patients were 55.02% less likely and high-risk patients were 61.26% less likely to undergo PCI (p < 0.001). Length of stay means for index admissions were 2.96, 7.83, and 16.32 days for low, intermediate, and high-risk groups. Intermediate and high-risk frailty had longer length of stay, higher total cost, and were more likely to be discharged to a skilled facility (p < 0.001)., Conclusion: Among adult, all-payer inpatient visits, frailty discerned by the hospital frailty risk score was associated with increased readmissions, increased healthcare resource utilization, and lower PCI administration., (© 2023 Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Background: Optimal dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) duration in patients at high bleeding risk (HBR) is not fully defined. We aimed to compare the safety and effectiveness of short-term DAPT (S-DAPT) with longer duration DAPT (L-DAPT) after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug eluting stents (DES) in patients at HBR., Methods: We searched for studies comparing S-DAPT (≤3 months) followed by aspirin or P2Y 12 inhibitor monotherapy against L-DAPT (6-12 months) after PCI in HBR patients. Primary end points of interest were major bleeding and myocardial infarction (MI). Random-effects meta-analyses were performed to calculate odds ratios with 95% CIs., Results: Six randomized trials and 3 propensity-matched studies (n = 16,848) were included in the primary analysis. Compared with L-DAPT (n = 8,422), major bleeding was lower with S-DAPT (n = 8,426) [OR 0.68; 95% CI 0.51-0.89] whereas MI did not differ significantly between the 2 groups [1.16; 0.94-1.44]. There were no significant differences in risks of death, stroke or stent thrombosis (ST) between S-DAPT and L-DAPT groups. These findings were consistent when propensity-matched studies were analysed separately. Finally, there was a numerically higher, albeit statistically non-significant, ST in the S-DAPT arm of patients without an indication for OAC [1.98; 0.86-4.58]., Conclusions: Among HBR patients undergoing current generation DES implantation, S-DAPT reduces bleeding without an increased risk of death or MI compared with L-DAPT. More research is needed to (1) evaluate risks of late ST after 1 to 3 months DAPT among patients with high ischemic and bleeding risks, (2) defining the SAPT of choice after 1 to 3 months DAPT., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Randomized controlled trials comparing drug eluting stents (DES) with bare-metal stents (BMS) for saphenous vein graft (SVG) interventions have shown conflicting results. We conducted this meta-analysis to evaluate the cumulative evidence for long-term efficacy and safety of DES vs BMS in SVG lesions. A systematic search was conducted of Randomized controlled trials comparing DES vs BMS in patients undergoing percutaneous interventions for SVG lesions. End-points of interest were all-cause death, cardiac death, myocardial infarction, target lesion revascularization and target vessel revascularization at longest available follow-up. Random effects meta-analysis was conducted to estimate risk ratio with 95% confidence intervals for individual end-points. Seven studies with 1639 patients were included in the final analysis. Mean follow-up period was 32 months. Compared with BMS, DES was associated with similar risks of all-cause death (risk ratio 1.06; 95% confidence intervals 0.76-1.48) and cardiac death (0.95; 0.59-1.54). Similarly, there were no differences between DES and BMS in terms of myocardial infarction (0.81; 0.50-1.29), target vessel revascularization (0.73; 0.48-1.110 or target lesion revascularization (1.05; 0.76-1.43). Current analysis suggests no strong evidence for routine DES use in patients undergoing SVG intervention. Future studies should evaluate if SVG lesion characteristics could influence these results., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

We sought to study the feasibility of axillary artery as alternative access for mechanical circulatory support (MCS) in cardiogenic shock and high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention (HR-PCI) patients with severe occlusive peripheral artery disease (PAD). In patients with severe PAD, the iliofemoral artery may be so diseased preventing deployment of MCS, precluding the use of lifesaving therapy. In such circumstances, the axillary artery may be a viable access site. Records of all patients presenting with cardiogenic shock or HR-PCI requiring MCS through axillary artery access at our institution from January 2016 to September 2018 were examined. Demographics, clinical, procedural, and outcomes data were collected on all patients. A total of 48 patients presented with cardiogenic shock (60%) or HR-PCI (40%) requiring MCS via axillary artery due to prohibitive PAD (mean age 66 ± 11 years). Admission diagnoses were non-ST segment elevation myocardial infarction (38%), unstable angina (23%), ST segment elevation myocardial infarction (19%), and cardiac arrest (21%). Time from axillary access to activation of Impella was 11.9 ± 4 minutes. Four patients required concomitant Impella RP for right ventricular support due to biventricular cardiogenic shock. Twenty-two patients died before Impella was explanted due to multiorgan failure, stroke, and infection. None of the patients who died had vascular complications related to axillary access. Axillary artery appears to be a viable alternative access for large bore devices in patients with prohibitive PAD. As experience of the field with this approach grows, it may be the default access for deployment of large bore sheaths in the future., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Traditionally, brachial and common femoral arteries have served as access sites of choice, with many operators recently converting to radial artery access for coronary angiography and percutaneous intervention due to literature suggesting reduced bleeding risk, better patient outcomes, and lower hospital-associated costs. However, radial access has limitations when percutaneous procedures requiring larger sheath sizes are performed. Six Fr sheaths are considered the limit for safe use with the radial artery given that the typical luminal diameter of the vessel is approximately 2 mm, while peripheral artery disease (PAD) may often limit use of the common femoral artery, particularly in patients with multiple co-morbid risk factors. Similarly, the brachial artery has fallen out of favor due to both thrombotic and bleeding risks, while also not safely and reliably accommodating sheaths larger than 7 Fr. Here we describe 3 cases of a new entirely percutaneous technique utilizing the axillary artery for delivery of Impella 2.5 (13.5 Fr) and CP (14 Fr) cardiac-assist devices for protected percutaneous coronary intervention in the setting of prohibitive PAD.