Publications

BACKGROUND: Substance use increases risk of cardiovascular events, particularly among women with additional risk factors like housing instability. While multiple substance use is common among unstably housed individuals, relationships between multiple substance use and cardiovascular risk factors like blood pressure are not well characterized.

METHODS: We conducted a cohort study between 2016 and 2019 to examine associations between multiple substance use and blood pressure in women experiencing homelessness and unstable housing. Participants completed six monthly visits including vital sign assessment, interview, and blood draw to assess toxicology-confirmed substance use (e.g., cocaine, alcohol, opioids) and cardiovascular health. We used linear mixed models to evaluate the outcomes of systolic and diastolic blood pressure (SBP; DBP).

RESULTS: Mean age was 51.6 years; 74 % were women of color. Prevalence of any substance use was 85 %; 63 % of participants used at least two substances at baseline. Adjusting for race, body mass index and cholesterol, cocaine was the only substance significantly associated with SBP (4.71 mmHg higher; 95 % CI 1.68, 7.74) and DBP (2.83 mmHg higher; 95 % CI 0.72, 4.94). Further analysis found no differences in SBP or DBP between those with concurrent use of other stimulants, depressants, or both with cocaine, compared to those who used cocaine only.

CONCLUSIONS: Cocaine was the only substance associated with higher SBP and DBP, even after accounting for simultaneous use of other substances. Along with interventions to address cocaine use, stimulant use screening during cardiovascular risk assessment and intensive blood pressure management may improve cardiovascular outcomes among women experiencing housing instability.

BACKGROUND: Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is increasingly used to revascularize patients ineligible for CABG, but few studies describe these patients and their outcomes.

OBJECTIVES: This study sought to describe characteristics, utility of risk prediction, and outcomes of patients with left main or multivessel coronary artery disease ineligible for coronary bypass grafting (CABG).

METHODS: Patients with complex coronary artery disease ineligible for CABG were enrolled in a prospective registry of medical therapy + PCI. Angiograms were evaluated by an independent core laboratory. Observed-to-expected 30-day mortality ratios were calculated using The Society for Thoracic Surgeons (STS) and EuroSCORE (European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation) II scores, surgeon-estimated 30-day mortality, and the National Cardiovascular Data Registry (NCDR) CathPCI model. Health status was assessed at baseline, 1 month, and 6 months.

RESULTS: A total of 726 patients were enrolled from 22 programs. The mean SYNTAX (Synergy Between Percutaneous Coronary Intervention With Taxus and Cardiac Surgery) score was 32.4 ± 12.2 before and 15.0 ± 11.7 after PCI. All-cause mortality was 5.6% at 30 days and 12.3% at 6 months. Observed-to-expected mortality ratios were 1.06 (95% CI: 0.71-1.36) with The Society for Thoracic Surgeons score, 0.99 (95% CI: 0.71-1.27) with the EuroSCORE II, 0.59 (95% CI: 0.42-0.77) using cardiac surgeons' estimates, and 4.46 (95% CI: 2.35-7.99) using the NCDR CathPCI score. Health status improved significantly from baseline to 6 months: SAQ summary score (65.9 ± 22.5 vs 86.5 ± 15.1; P < 0.0001), Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire summary score (54.1 ± 27.2 vs 82.6 ± 19.7; P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS: Patients ineligible for CABG who undergo PCI have complex clinical profiles and high disease burden. Following PCI, short-term mortality is considerably lower than surgeons' estimates, similar to surgical risk model predictions but is over 4-fold higher than estimated by the NCDR CathPCI model. Patients' health status improved significantly through 6 months.

BACKGROUND: Medicare links hospital performance on readmissions and mortality to payment solely on the basis of outcomes among fee-for-service (FFS) beneficiaries. Whether including Medicare Advantage (MA) beneficiaries, who account for nearly half of all Medicare beneficiaries, in the evaluation of hospital performance affects rankings is unknown.

OBJECTIVE: To determine if the inclusion of MA beneficiaries in readmission and mortality measures reclassifies hospital performance rankings compared with current measures.

DESIGN: Cross-sectional.

SETTING: Population-based.

PARTICIPANTS: Hospitals participating in the Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program or Hospital Value-Based Purchasing Program.

MEASUREMENTS: Using the 100% Medicare files for FFS and MA claims, the authors calculated 30-day risk-adjusted readmissions and mortality for acute myocardial infarction, heart failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and pneumonia on the basis of only FFS beneficiaries and then both FFS and MA beneficiaries. Hospitals were divided into quintiles of performance based on FFS beneficiaries only, and the proportion of hospitals that were reclassified to a different performance group with the inclusion of MA beneficiaries was calculated.

RESULTS: Of the hospitals in the top-performing quintile for readmissions and mortality based on FFS beneficiaries, between 21.6% and 30.2% were reclassified to a lower-performing quintile with the inclusion of MA beneficiaries. Similar proportions of hospitals were reclassified from the bottom performance quintile to a higher one across all measures and conditions. Hospitals with a higher proportion of MA beneficiaries were more likely to improve in performance rankings.

LIMITATION: Hospital performance measurement and risk adjustment differed slightly from those used by Medicare.

CONCLUSION: Approximately 1 in 4 top-performing hospitals is reclassified to a lower performance group when MA beneficiaries are included in the evaluation of hospital readmissions and mortality. These findings suggest that Medicare's current value-based programs provide an incomplete picture of hospital performance.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Laura and John Arnold Foundation.

Background: Balloon uncrossable lesions are defined as lesions that cannot be crossed with a balloon after successful guidewire crossing. Methods: We analyzed the association between balloon uncrossable lesions and procedural outcomes of 8671 chronic total occlusions (CTOs) percutaneous coronary interventions (PCIs) performed between 2012 and 2022 at 41 centers. Results: The prevalence of balloon uncrossable lesions was 9.2%. The mean patient age was 64.2 ± 10 years and 80% were men. Patients with balloon uncrossable lesions were older (67.3 ± 9 vs. 63.9 ± 10, p < 0.001) and more likely to have prior coronary artery bypass graft surgery (40% vs. 25%, p < 0.001) and diabetes mellitus (50% vs. 42%, p < 0.001) compared with patients who had balloon crossable lesions. In-stent restenosis (23% vs. 16%. p < 0.001), moderate/severe calcification (68% vs. 40%, p < 0.001), and moderate/severe proximal vessel tortuosity (36% vs. 25%, p < 0.001) were more common in balloon uncrossable lesions. Procedure time (132 (90, 197) vs. 109 (71, 160) min, p < 0.001) was longer and the air kerma radiation dose (2.55 (1.41, 4.23) vs. 1.97 (1.10, 3.40) min, p < 0.001) was higher in balloon uncrossable lesions, while these lesions displayed lower technical (91% vs. 99%, p < 0.001) and procedural (88% vs. 96%, p < 0.001) success rates and higher major adverse cardiac event (MACE) rates (3.14% vs. 1.49%, p < 0.001). Several techniques were required for balloon uncrossable lesions. Conclusion: In a contemporary, multicenter registry, 9.2% of the successfully crossed CTOs were initially balloon uncrossable. Balloon uncrossable lesions exhibited lower technical and procedural success rates and a higher risk of complications compared with balloon crossable lesions.

PURPOSE: The value of intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) guidance during peripheral vascular revascularization procedures is incompletely understood. Moreover, data on long-term clinical outcomes and costs are limited. The objective of this study was to compare outcomes and costs between IVUS and contrast angiography alone in patients undergoing peripheral revascularization procedures in Japan.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective comparative analysis was performed using the Japanese Medical Data Vision insurance claims database. All patients undergoing revascularization for peripheral artery disease (PAD) between April 2009 and July 2019 were included. Patients were followed until July 2020, death, or a subsequent revascularization procedure for PAD. Two patient groups were compared: one undergoing IVUS imaging or the other contrast angiography alone. The primary end point was major adverse cardiac and limb events, including all-cause-mortality, endovascular thrombolysis, subsequent revascularization procedures for PAD, stroke, acute myocardial infarction, and major amputations. Total health care costs were documented over the follow-up and compared between groups, using a bootstrap method.

RESULTS: The study included 3956 patients in the IVUS group and 5889 in the angiography alone group. Intravascular ultrasound was significantly associated with reduced risk of a subsequent revascularization procedure (adjusted hazard ratio: 0.25 [0.22-0.28]) and major adverse cardiac and limb events (0.69 [0.65-0.73]). The total costs were significantly lower in the IVUS group, with a mean cost saving over follow-up of $18 173 [$7 695-$28 595] per patient.

CONCLUSION: The use of IVUS during peripheral revascularization provides superior long-term clinical outcomes at lower costs compared with contrast angiography alone, warranting wider adoption and fewer barriers to IVUS reimbursement for patients with PAD undergoing routine revascularization.

CLINICAL IMPACT: Intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) guidance during peripheral vascular revascularization has been introduced to improve the precision of the procedure. However, questions over the benefit of IVUS in terms of long-term clinical outcome and over cost have limited its use in everyday clinical practice. This study, performed in a Japanese health insurance claims database, demonstrates that use of IVUS provides a superior clinical outcome over the long term at a lower cost compared to angiography alone. These findings should encourage clinicians to use IVUS in routine peripheral vascular revascularization procedures and encourage providers to reduce barriers to use.

BACKGROUND: Frailty is increasingly recognized as a useful measure of vulnerability in older adults. Multiple claims-based frailty indices (CFIs) can readily identify individuals with frailty, but whether 1 CFI improves prediction over another is unknown. We sought to assess the ability of 5 distinct CFIs to predict long-term institutionalization (LTI) and mortality in older Veterans.

METHODS: Retrospective study conducted in U.S. Veterans ≥65 years without prior LTI or hospice use in 2014. Five CFIs were compared: Kim, Orkaby (Veteran Affairs Frailty Index [VAFI]), Segal, Figueroa, and the JEN-FI, grounded in different theories of frailty: Rockwood cumulative deficit (Kim and VAFI), Fried physical phenotype (Segal), or expert opinion (Figueroa and JFI). The prevalence of frailty according to each CFI was compared. CFI performance for the coprimary outcomes of any LTI or mortality from 2015 to 2017 was examined. Because Segal and Kim include age, sex, or prior utilization, these variables were added to regression models to compare all 5 CFIs. Logistic regression was used to calculate model discrimination and calibration for both outcomes.

RESULTS: A total of 3 million Veterans were included (mean age 75, 98% male participants, 80% White, and 9% Black). Frailty was identified for between 6.8% and 25.7% of the cohort with 2.6% identified as frail by all 5 CFIs. There was no meaningful difference between CFIs in the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for LTI (0.78-0.80) or mortality (0.77-0.79).

CONCLUSIONS: Based on different frailty constructs, and identifying different subsets of the population, all 5 CFIs similarly predicted LTI or death, suggesting each could be used for prediction or analytics.

Background Mortality prediction in critically ill patients with cardiogenic shock can guide triage and selection of potentially high-risk treatment options. Methods and Results We developed and externally validated a checklist risk score to predict in-hospital mortality among adults admitted to the cardiac intensive care unit with Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions Shock Stage C or greater cardiogenic shock using 2 real-world data sets and Risk-Calibrated Super-sparse Linear Integer Modeling (RiskSLIM). We compared this model to those developed using conventional penalized logistic regression and published cardiogenic shock and intensive care unit mortality prediction models. There were 8815 patients in our training cohort (in-hospital mortality 13.4%) and 2237 patients in our validation cohort (in-hospital mortality 22.8%), and there were 39 candidate predictor variables. The final risk score (termed BOS,MA2) included maximum blood urea nitrogen ≥25 mg/dL, minimum oxygen saturation <88%, minimum systolic blood pressure <80 mm Hg, use of mechanical ventilation, age ≥60 years, and maximum anion gap ≥14 mmol/L, based on values recorded during the first 24 hours of intensive care unit stay. Predicted in-hospital mortality ranged from 0.5% for a score of 0 to 70.2% for a score of 6. The area under the receiver operating curve was 0.83 (0.82-0.84) in training and 0.76 (0.73-0.78) in validation, and the expected calibration error was 0.9% in training and 2.6% in validation. Conclusions Developed using a novel machine learning method and the largest cardiogenic shock cohorts among published models, BOS,MA2 is a simple, clinically interpretable risk score that has improved performance compared with existing cardiogenic-shock risk scores and better calibration than general intensive care unit risk scores.

Estimating the likelihood of urgent mechanical circulatory support (MCS) can facilitate procedural planning and clinical decision-making in chronic total occlusion (CTO) percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). We analyzed 2,784 CTO PCIs performed between 2012 and 2021 at 12 centers. The variable importance was estimated by a bootstrap applying a random forest algorithm to a propensity-matched sample (a ratio of 1:5 matching cases with controls on center). The identified variables were used to predict the risk of urgent MCS. The performance of the risk model was assessed in-sample and on 2,411 out-of-sample procedures that did not require urgent MCS. Urgent MCS was used in 62 (2.2%) of cases. Patients who required urgent MCS were older (70 [63 to 77] vs 66 [58 to 73] years, p = 0.003) compared with those who did not require urgent MCS. Technical (68% vs 87%, p <0.001) and procedural success (40% vs 85%, p <0.001) was lower in the urgent MCS group compared with cases that did not require urgent MCS. The risk model for urgent MCS use included retrograde crossing strategy, left ventricular ejection fraction, and lesion length. The resulting model demonstrated good calibration and discriminatory capacity with the area under the curve (95% confidence interval) of 0.79 (0.73 to 0.86) and specificity and sensitivity of 86% and 52%, respectively. In the out-of-sample set, the specificity of the model was 87%. The Prospective Global Registry for the Study of Chronic Total Occlusion Intervention CTO MCS score can help estimate the risk of urgent MCS use during CTO PCI.