Nileshkumar J. Patel

Background Pulseless ventricular tachycardia/ventricular fibrillation (VT/VF) is the initial rhythm in a third of in‐hospital cardiac arrest patients. Mechanical circulatory support (MCS) device use remains poorly understood in this population. Methods We conducted an observational analysis of temporal trends in the utilization of MCS in VT/VF IHCA between January 2008 and December 2014 utilizing the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) database. Using multivariable analysis, we assessed factors associated with MCS use and survival to discharge. Results Among 151,628 hospitalizations with VT/VF IHCA, 14,981 (9.9%) received MCS. Intra‐aortic balloon pump (IABP) was the most commonly used MCS (9.1%). From 2008 to 2014, there was significant increase in the utilization of MCS (8.7–11%; p_trend < 0.0001). On multivariable analysis, there was 12‐fold increase and three‐fold increase in the utilization of PVAD and ECMO respectively; however, there was no significant change in the use of IABP. Over the seven‐year sample period, there was significant increase in the overall survival to hospital discharge (35.4–43.5%; p_trend < 0.0001). Survival to hospital discharge increased in both MCS and non‐MCS groups. Conclusion There was significant increase in utilization of MCS after VT/VF IHCA during the study period. IABP was the most commonly utilized MCS. The survival to hospital discharge increased in the overall study population including both MCS and non‐MCS groups. Future studies are needed to identify patient population most likely to benefit from the use of MCS after VT/VF IHCA.

Background: Despite improvements in acute care and survival after non‐ST‐elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE‐ACS) hospitalization, early readmissions remain common, and have significant clinical and financial impact.Objectives: Determine the predictors and etiologies of 30‐day readmissions in NSTE‐ACS.Method: The study cohort was derived from the National Readmission Database 2014 identifying patients with a primary diagnosis of NSTE‐ACS using ICD9 code.Results: We identified a total of 300,269 patients admitted with NSTE‐ACS; 13.4% were readmitted within 30‐day. The most common cause of readmission was heart failure (HF) (15.6%), followed by a recurrent myocardial infarction (MI) (10%). Predictors of increased readmissions were age ≥ 75 years (OR: 1.34, 95% CI: 1.30–1.39), female gender (OR 1.12, 95% CI 1.09–1.16), a Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) >3 (OR 2.11, 95% CI: 2.04–2.18), ESRD (OR 2.01, 95% CI 1.89–2.14), CKD (OR: 1.58, 95% CI: 1.51–1.64), length of stay ≥5 days (OR: 1.51, 95% CI 1.46–1.56) and adverse events during the index admission such as AKI (OR:1.31, 95% CI: 1.25–1.36), major bleeding (OR:1.20, 95% CI: 1.12–1.24); whereas admission to a teaching hospital (OR 0.92, 95% CI 0.89–0.95) and PCI (OR 0.70, 95% CI 0.67–0.72) were associated with less likelihood of 30‐day readmission.Conclusion: Readmission rate at 30‐days is high among NSTE‐ACS patients and the most common readmission etiologies are HF and recurrent MI. A CCI more than 3 and ESRD were the most significant predictors for readmission; patients undergoing PCI had less odds of readmission.

Introduction: Impella is a catheter-based micro-axial flow pump placed across the aortic valve, and it is currently the only percutaneous left ventricular assist device approved for high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention and cardiogenic shock.Areas Covered: Even though several studies have repeatedly demonstrated the excellent hemodynamic profile of Impella in high-risk settings, it remains underutilized. Here we aim to provide an up-to-date summary of the available literature on Impellas use in High risk settingsas well as the practical aspectsof its usage.Expert Commentary: Percutaneous coronary interventions in high rsk settings have always been challenging for a physician. Impella 2.5 and CP, have been proven safe, cost effective and feasible in High Risk Percutaneous coronary Interventions with an excellent hemodynamic profile.

Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is an integral treatment modality for acute coronary syndromes (ACS) as well as chronic stable coronary artery disease (CAD) not responsive to optimal medical therapy. This coupled with studies on the feasibility and safety of performing PCI in centers without on-site surgical backup led to widespread growth of PCI centers. However, this has been accompanied by a recent steep decline in the volume of PCIs at both the operator and hospital level, which raises concerns regarding minimal procedural volumes required to maintain necessary skills and favorable clinical outcomes. The 2011 ACC/AHA/SCAI competency statement required PCI be performed by operators with a minimal procedural volume of >75 PCIs annually at high-volume centers with >400 PCIs per year, a number which was relaxed in the 2013 ACC/AHA/SCAI update to >50 PCIs/operator/year in hospitals with >200 PCIs annually to coincide with reduction in national PCI volume. Recent data suggests that many hospitals do not meet these thresholds. We review data on the importance of volume as a vital quality metric at both an operator and hospital level in determining procedural outcomes following PCI.

Objective The aim of our study was to study the impact of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors (GPI) on in‐hospital outcomes. Background There is paucity of data regarding the impact of GPI on the outcomes following peripheral endovascular interventions. Methods The study cohort was derived from Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project (HCUP) Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) database between the years 2006 and 2011. Peripheral endovascular interventions and GPI utilization were identified using appropriate ICD‐9 Diagnostic and procedural codes. Two‐level hierarchical multivariate mixed models were created. The study outcomes were: primary (in‐hospital mortality and amputation studied separately) and secondary (composite of in‐hospital mortality and postprocedural complications). Hospitalization costs were also assessed. Results GPI utilization (OR, 95% CI, P‐value) was independently predictive of lower amputation rates (0.36, 0.27–0.49, P 0.117), although GPI use predicted worse secondary outcomes (1.23, 1.03–1.47, 0.023). Following propensity matching, the amputation rate was lower (3.2% vs. 8%, P < 0.001), while hospitalization costs were higher in the cohort that received GPI ($21,091 ± 404 vs. 19,407 ± 133, P < 0.001). Conclusions Multivariate analysis revealed GPI use in peripheral endovascular interventions to be suggestive of an increase in composite end‐point of in‐hospital mortality and postprocedural complications, no impact on in‐hospital mortality alone, significantly lower rate of amputation, and increase in hospitalization costs.

Prior studies have highlighted disparities in cardiac lifesaving procedure utilization, particularly among women and in minorities. Although there has been a significant increase in implantable cardioverter‐defibrillator (ICD) insertion, socioeconomic disparities still exist in the trend of ICD utilization. With the use of the Nationwide Inpatient Sample from 2003 through 2011, we identified subjects with ICD insertion (procedure code 37.94) and cardiac resynchronization defibrillator (procedure code 00.50, 00.51) as codified by the International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification. Overall, 1 020 076 ICDs were implanted in the United States from 2003 to 2011. We observed an initial increase in ICD utilization by 51%, from 95 062 in 2003 to 143 262 in 2006, followed by a more recent decline. The majority of ICDs were implanted in men age ≥65 years. Implantation of ICDs was 2.5× more common in men than in women (402 per million vs 163 per million). Approximately 95% of the ICDs were implanted in insured patients, and 5% were used in the uninsured population. There has been a significant increase in ICD implantation in blacks, from 162 per million in 2003 to 291 per million in 2011. We found a significant difference in the volume of ICD implants between the insured and the uninsured patient populations. Racial disparities have narrowed significantly in comparison with those noted in earlier studies and are now more reflective of the population demographics at large. On the other hand, significant gender disparities continue to exist.