Publications

2024

Korjian, Serge, Killian J McCarthy, Emily A Larnard, Donald E Cutlip, Margaret B McEntegart, Ajay J Kirtane, and Robert W Yeh. (2024) 2024. “Drug-Coated Balloons in the Management of Coronary Artery Disease.”. Circulation. Cardiovascular Interventions 17 (5): e013302. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.123.013302.

Drug-coated balloons (DCBs) are specialized coronary devices comprised of a semicompliant balloon catheter with an engineered coating that allows the delivery of antiproliferative agents locally to the vessel wall during percutaneous coronary intervention. Although DCBs were initially developed more than a decade ago, their potential in coronary interventions has recently sparked renewed interest, especially in the United States. Originally designed to overcome the limitations of conventional balloon angioplasty and stenting, they aim to match or even improve upon the outcomes of drug-eluting stents without leaving a permanent implant. Presently, in-stent restenosis is the condition with the most robust evidence supporting the use of DCBs. DCBs provide improved long-term vessel patency compared with conventional balloon angioplasty and may be comparable to drug-eluting stents without the need for an additional stent layer, supporting their use as a first-line therapy for in-stent restenosis. Beyond the treatment of in-stent restenosis, DCBs provide an additional tool for de novo lesions for a strategy that avoids a permanent metal scaffold, which may be especially useful for the management of technically challenging anatomies such as small vessels and bifurcations. DCBs might also be advantageous for patients with high bleeding risk due to the decreased necessity for extended antiplatelet therapy, and in patients with diabetes and patients with diffuse disease to minimize long-stented segments. Further studies are crucial to confirm these broader applications for DCBs and to further validate safety and efficacy.

Liu, Michael, Sahil Sandhu, Karen E Joynt Maddox, and Rishi K Wadhera. (2024) 2024. “Health Equity Adjustment and Hospital Performance in the Medicare Value-Based Purchasing Program.”. JAMA 331 (16): 1387-96. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2024.2440.

IMPORTANCE: Medicare's Hospital Value-Based Purchasing (HVBP) program will provide a health equity adjustment (HEA) to hospitals that have greater proportions of patients dually eligible for Medicare and Medicaid and that offer high-quality care beginning in fiscal year 2026. However, which hospitals will benefit most from this policy change and to what extent are unknown.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate potential changes in hospital performance after HEA and examine hospital patient mix, structural, and geographic characteristics associated with receipt of increased payments.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This cross-sectional study analyzed all 2676 hospitals participating in the HVBP program in fiscal year 2021. Publicly available data on program performance and hospital characteristics were linked to Medicare claims data on all inpatient stays for dual-eligible beneficiaries at each hospital to calculate HEA points and HVBP payment adjustments.

EXPOSURES: Hospital Value-Based Purchasing program HEA.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Reclassification of HVBP bonus or penalty status and changes in payment adjustments across hospital characteristics.

RESULTS: Of 2676 hospitals participating in the HVBP program in fiscal year 2021, 1470 (54.9%) received bonuses and 1206 (45.1%) received penalties. After HEA, 102 hospitals (6.9%) were reclassified from bonus to penalty status, whereas 119 (9.9%) were reclassified from penalty to bonus status. At the hospital level, mean (SD) HVBP payment adjustments decreased by $4534 ($90 033) after HEA, ranging from a maximum reduction of $1 014 276 to a maximum increase of $1 523 765. At the aggregate level, net-positive changes in payment adjustments were largest among safety net hospitals ($28 971 708) and those caring for a higher proportion of Black patients ($15 468 445). The likelihood of experiencing increases in payment adjustments was significantly higher among safety net compared with non-safety net hospitals (574 of 683 [84.0%] vs 709 of 1993 [35.6%]; adjusted rate ratio [ARR], 2.04 [95% CI, 1.89-2.20]) and high-proportion Black hospitals compared with non-high-proportion Black hospitals (396 of 523 [75.7%] vs 887 of 2153 [41.2%]; ARR, 1.40 [95% CI, 1.29-1.51]). Rural hospitals (374 of 612 [61.1%] vs 909 of 2064 [44.0%]; ARR, 1.44 [95% CI, 1.30-1.58]), as well as those located in the South (598 of 1040 [57.5%] vs 192 of 439 [43.7%]; ARR, 1.25 [95% CI, 1.10-1.42]) and in Medicaid expansion states (801 of 1651 [48.5%] vs 482 of 1025 [47.0%]; ARR, 1.16 [95% CI, 1.06-1.28]), were also more likely to experience increased payment adjustments after HEA compared with their urban, Northeastern, and Medicaid nonexpansion state counterparts, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Medicare's implementation of HEA in the HVBP program will significantly reclassify hospital performance and redistribute program payments, with safety net and high-proportion Black hospitals benefiting most from this policy change. These findings suggest that HEA is an important strategy to ensure that value-based payment programs are more equitable.

Watson, Nathan W, Ido Weinberg, Andrew B Dicks, Brett J Carroll, and Eric A Secemsky. (2024) 2024. “Clinical Outcomes and Predictors of Advanced Therapy for the Management of Right Heart Thrombus.”. Circulation. Cardiovascular Interventions 17 (4): e013637. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.123.013637.

BACKGROUND: The role of advanced therapies (systemic thrombolysis, catheter-based treatment, and surgical thrombectomy) for the management of right heart thrombus is poorly defined. In this study, we assessed the clinical predictors and outcomes of advanced therapy compared with anticoagulation alone for the acute management of right heart thrombus.

METHODS: In this observational cohort study, we analyzed consecutive patients who were treated for right heart thrombus. The primary end point was 90-day all-cause mortality. Clinical predictors of utilizing advanced therapy were assessed with multivariable logistic regression. Propensity score matching was utilized to compare adjusted outcomes between patients receiving advanced therapies versus anticoagulation alone.

RESULTS: A total of 345 patients were included in the study. Advanced therapy was utilized in 13.6% (N=47) of patients, of which 25.5% (N=12/47) was systemic thrombolysis, 23.4% (N=11/47) was endovascular thrombectomy, and 53.2% (N=25/47) was surgical thrombectomy. Younger age (odds ratio, 0.98 [95% CI, 0.96-0.99]) and concurrent pulmonary embolism (odds ratio, 5.36 [95% CI, 2.48-12.1]) predicted utilization of advanced therapy. In propensity score-matched analysis, there was no difference in 90-day mortality (hazard ratio, 0.46 [95% CI, 0.17-1.22]), in-hospital mortality (odds ratio, 0.64 [95% CI, 0.17-2.19]), or length of stay (β, -4.39 [95% CI, -14.0 to 5.22]) between advanced therapy and anticoagulation.

CONCLUSIONS: Among a diverse cohort of patients with right heart thrombus, outcomes did not differ between those who underwent advanced therapy and anticoagulation alone. Important predictors for utilizing advanced treatment included younger age and the presence of a concurrent pulmonary embolism. Future studies assessing advanced therapy in larger and broader patient populations are necessary.

Paraskevas, Kosmas I, Alan Dardik, Marc L Schermerhorn, Christos D Liapis, Armando Mansilha, Brajesh K Lal, William A Gray, et al. (2024) 2024. “Why Selective Screening for Asymptomatic Carotid Stenosis Is Currently Appropriate: A Special Report.”. Expert Review of Cardiovascular Therapy 22 (4-5): 159-65. https://doi.org/10.1080/14779072.2024.2330660.

INTRODUCTION: Two of the main reasons recent guidelines do not recommend routine population-wide screening programs for asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis (AsxCS) is that screening could lead to an increase of carotid revascularization procedures and that such mass screening programs may not be cost-effective. Nevertheless, selective screening for AsxCS could have several benefits. This article presents the rationale for such a program.

AREAS COVERED: The benefits of selective screening for AsxCS include early recognition of AsxCS allowing timely initiation of preventive measures to reduce future myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, cardiac death and cardiovascular (CV) event rates.

EXPERT OPINION: Mass screening programs for AsxCS are neither clinically effective nor cost-effective. Nevertheless, targeted screening of populations at high risk for AsxCS provides an opportunity to identify these individuals earlier rather than later and to initiate a number of lifestyle measures, risk factor modifications, and intensive medical therapy in order to prevent future strokes and CV events. For patients at 'higher risk of stroke' on best medical treatment, a prophylactic carotid intervention may be considered.

Strom, Jordan B, Monica Mukherjee, Lauren Beussink-Nelson, Julius M Gardin, Benjamin H Freed, Sanjiv J Shah, and Jonathan Afilalo. (2024) 2024. “Reference Values for Indexed Echocardiographic Chamber Sizes in Older Adults: The Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis.”. Journal of the American Heart Association 13 (8): e034029. https://doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.123.034029.

BACKGROUND: Normalization of echocardiographic chamber measurements for body surface area may result in misclassification of individuals with obesity or sarcopenia. Normalization for alternative measures of body size may be preferable, but there remains a dearth of information on their normative values and association with cardiovascular function metrics.

METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 3032 individuals underwent comprehensive 2-dimensional echocardiography at Exam 6 in MESA (Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis). In the subgroup of 608 individuals free of cardiopulmonary disease (69.5±7.0 years, 46% male, 48% White, 17% Chinese, 15% Black, 21% Hispanic), normative values were derived for left and right cardiac chamber measurements across a variety of ratiometric (body surface area, body mass index, height) and allometric (height1.6, height2.7) scaling parameters. Normative upper and lower reference values were provided for each scaling parameter stratified across age groups, sex, and race or ethnicity. Among scaling parameters, body surface area and height were associated with the least variability across race and ethnicity categories and height2.7 was associated with the least variability across sex categories.

CONCLUSIONS: In this diverse cohort of community-dwelling older adults, we provide normative values for common echocardiographic parameters across a variety of indexation methods.

Aggarwal, Rahul, Christian T Ruff, Saverio Virdone, Sylvie Perreault, Ajay K Kakkar, Michael G Palazzolo, Marc Dorais, Gloria Kayani, and Robert W Yeh. (2024) 2024. “Response by Aggarwal et Al to Letter Regarding Article, ‘Development and Validation of the DOAC Score: A Novel Bleeding Risk Prediction Tool for Patients With Atrial Fibrillation on Direct-Acting Oral Anticoagulants’.”. Circulation 149 (16): e1111-e1112. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.123.068239.