Intervention Outcomes Network Registry Research Articles

In-Hospital Bleeding Outcomes of Myocardial Infarction in the Era of Warfarin and Direct Oral Anticoagulants for Atrial Fibrillation in the United States: A Report From the National Cardiovascular Data Registry Acute Coronary Treatment and Intervention Outcomes Network Registry.

BackgroundWe sought to examine patient characteristics, peri‐infarction invasive and pharmacologic management, and in‐hospital major bleeding in myocardial infarction patients with atrial fibrillation or flutter, based on home anticoagulant use.Methods and ResultsWe stratified patients by home anticoagulant: (1) no anticoagulant, (2) warfarin, and (3) direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) among ST‐segment–elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and non‐STEMI (NSTEMI) patients with atrial fibrillation or flutter treated at 761 US hospitals in the ACTION (Acute Coronary Treatment and Intervention Outcomes Network) Registry from January 2015 to December 2016. The primary outcome of our study was in‐hospital major bleeding. Multivariable logistic regression was used to examine the independent association between home anticoagulant and in‐hospital major bleeding. Among 6471 STEMI patients with atrial fibrillation or flutter, 15.7% were on warfarin and 13.0% on DOACs; among 19 954 NSTEMI patients, 22.8% were on warfarin and 15.4% on DOACs. In STEMI, door‐to‐balloon times were slightly higher in those on anticoagulant, with similar rates of angiography within 24 hours in the 3 groups. NSTEMI patients on anticoagulant were less likely to undergo angiography (49.3% no anticoagulant, 33.4% on warfarin, 36.4% on DOACs; P<0.01) or percutaneous coronary intervention within 24 hours (21.1% no anticoagulant, 14.3% on warfarin, 15.9% on DOACs; P<0.01). After multivariate adjustment, use of home warfarin (odds ratio: 1.00 [95% CI, 0.79–1.27] in STEMI and 1.13 [95% CI, 0.97–1.30] in NSTEMI) or DOAC (odds ratio: 0.93 [95% CI, 0.73–1.20] in STEMI and 0.97 [95% CI, 0.81–1.16] in NSTEMI) was not associated with increased in‐hospital major bleeding compared with no anticoagulant.ConclusionsIn routine clinical practice, home warfarin or DOAC therapy is not associated with an increased risk of in‐hospital bleeding compared with no anticoagulant.

Trends in Performance and Opportunities for Improvement on a Composite Measure of Acute Myocardial Infarction Care.

Background Despite improvements on individual process of care measures for acute myocardial infarction (AMI), little is known about performance on a composite measure of AMI care that assesses the delivery of many components of high-quality AMI care. We sought to examine trends in patient- and hospital-level performance on a composite defect-free care measure, identify disparities in the performance across sociodemographic groups, and identify opportunities to further improve quality and outcomes. Methods and Results We calculated the proportion of patients in the National Cardiovascular Data Registry-Acute Coronary Treatment and Intervention Outcomes Network Registry-Get With The Guidelines (now known as the Chest Pain - Myocardial Infarction Registry) between January 1, 2010, and December 31, 2017, receiving defect-free AMI care including guideline-recommended pharmacotherapy, timely provision of medical and reperfusion therapy, assessment of ventricular function, referral to cardiac rehabilitation, and smoking cessation counseling for patients with AMI. A total of 522 800 patients at 222 hospitals were included. Overall, the proportion of patients receiving defect-free care significantly increased from 66.0% in 2010 to 77.1% in 2017 ( P<0.001). Improvements in performance were observed across all sociodemographic subgroups, with the greatest absolute improvement observed for black and Hispanic patients ( P<0.001). However, absolute performance was consistently lower among older patients, women, black and Hispanic patients, and those with government insurance in 2017 ( P<0.001 for all). Improvements in care and reduced variation in performance were observed at the hospital level overall (2010, median [IQR] 67.2% [40.7%-76.3%]; 2017, median [IQR] 80.7% [73.1%-88.1%]; P<0.001) as well as across region, safety net status, teaching status, and proportion of patients who are nonwhite and have Medicaid insurance coverage ( P<0.001 for all). Conclusions Despite improvements in the proportion of patients with AMI receiving defect-free care overall and across sociodemographic groups, nearly 1 in 4 patients in 2017 still did not receive optimal care and absolute performance was consistently lower among older patients, women, black, and Hispanic patients. Composite measures of cardiovascular care, which assess the delivery of several evidence-based processes of care, can illuminate opportunities to improve the quality of care beyond that provided by conventional process measures.

Association of acute myocardial infarction cardiac arrest patient volume and in‐hospital mortality in the United States: Insights from the National Cardiovascular Data Registry Acute Coronary Treatment And Intervention Outcomes Network Registry

BackgroundLittle is known about how differences in out of hospital cardiac arrest patient volume affect in‐hospital myocardial infarction (MI) mortality.HypothesisHospitals accepting cardiac arrest transfers will have increased hospital MI mortality.MethodsMI patients (ST elevation MI [STEMI] and non‐ST elevation MI [NSTEMI]) in the Acute Coronary Treatment Intervention Outcomes Network Registry were included. Hospital variation of cardiac arrest and temporal trend of the proportion of cardiac arrest MI patients were explored. Hospitals were divided into tertiles based on the proportion of cardiac arrest MI patients, and association between in‐hospital mortality and hospital tertiles of cardiac arrest was compared using logistic regression adjusting for case mix.ResultsA total of 252 882 patients from 224 hospitals were included, of whom 9682 (3.8%) had cardiac arrest (1.6% of NSTEMI and 7.5% of STEMI patients). The proportion of MI patients who had cardiac arrest admitted to each hospital was relatively low (median 3.7% [25th, 75th percentiles: 3.0%, 4.5%]).with a range of 4.2% to 12.4% in the high‐volume tertiles. Unadjusted in‐hospital mortality increased with tertile: low 3.8%, intermediate 4.6%, and high 4.7% (P < 0.001); this was no longer significantly different after adjustment (intermediate vs high tertile odds ratio (OR) = 1.02; 95% confidence interval [0.90‐1.16], low vs high tertile OR = 0.93 [0.83, 1.05]).ConclusionsThe proportion of MI patients who have cardiac arrest is low. In‐hospital mortality among all MI patients did not differ significantly between hospitals that had increased proportions of cardiac arrest MI patients. For most hospitals, overall MI mortality is unlikely to be adversely affected by treating cardiac arrest patients with MI.

Association of State Medicaid Expansion With Quality of Care and Outcomes for Low-Income Patients Hospitalized With Acute Myocardial Infarction

Lack of insurance is associated with worse care and outcomes among adults hospitalized for acute myocardial infarction (AMI). It is unclear whether states' decision to expand Medicaid eligibility under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act in 2014 were associated with improved quality of care and outcomes among low-income patients hospitalized with AMI. To investigate whether rates of uninsurance, quality of care, and outcomes changed among patients hospitalized for AMI 3 years after states elected to expand Medicaid compared with nonexpansion states. Retrospective cohort study completed at hospitals participating in National Cardiovascular Data Registry Acute Coronary Treatment and Intervention Outcomes Network Registry. Participants were patients younger than 65 years hospitalized for AMI from January 1, 2012, to December 31, 2016. State Medicaid expansion in 2014. Rates of uninsured and Medicaid-insured hospitalizations for AMI in states that expanded Medicaid vs those that did not. Comparison of in-hospital care quality, procedure use, and mortality between expansion and nonexpansion states for the years prior to and after Medicaid expansion. Hierarchical logistic regressions models were used to assess the association between Medicaid expansion and outcomes. The initial cohort included 325 343 patients. Uninsured AMI hospitalizations declined in expansion states (18.0% [4395 of 24 358 hospitalizations] to 8.4% [2638 of 31 382 hospitalizations]) and more modestly in nonexpansion states (25.6% [7963 of 31 137 hospitalizations] to 21.1% [8668 of 41 120 hospitalizations]) from 2012 to 2016 (P < .001 difference in trend expansion vs nonexpansion). Medicaid coverage increased from 7.5% (1818 of 24 358 hospitalizations) to 14.4% (4502 of 31 382 hospitalizations) in expansion states and 6.2% (1924 of 31 137 hospitalizations) to 6.6% (2717 of 41 120 hospitalizations) in nonexpansion states (P < .001). The low-income cohort included 55 737 patients across 765 sites. In expansion states, low-income adults' odds of receipt of defect-free care increased (76.3% to 75.9%, adjusted odds ratio 1.11; 95% CI, 1.02-1.21) but to a lesser degree than in nonexpansion states (72.8% to 74.5%, adjusted odds ratio, 1.38; 95% CI, 1.30-1.47; P for interaction < .001). There was no change in use of most procedures (ie, percutaneous coronary intervention for non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction) in expansion compared with nonexpansion states. Improvement in in-hospital mortality was similar between expansion and nonexpansion states (3.2% to 2.8%, adjusted odds ratio, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.77-1.12 vs 3.3% to 3.0%, adjusted odds ratio, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.73-0.99; P for interaction = .48). Medicaid expansion was associated with a significant reduction in rates of uninsurance among patients hospitalized with AMI. Quality of care and outcomes did not improve among low-income adults in expansion compared with nonexpansion states. Hospital care for AMI may be less sensitive to insurance than has been recognized in the past.

Improving Care of STEMI in the United States 2008 to 2012.

BackgroundWe aimed to determine the change in treatment strategies and times to treatment over the first 5 years of the Mission: Lifeline program.Methods and ResultsWe assessed pre‐ and in‐hospital care and outcomes from 2008 to 2012 for patients with ST‐segment–elevation myocardial infarction at US hospitals, using data from the National Cardiovascular Data Registry Acute Coronary Treatment and Intervention Outcomes Network Registry—Get With The Guidelines Registry. In‐hospital adjusted mortality was calculated including and excluding cardiac arrest as a reason for primary percutaneous coronary intervention delay. A total of 147 466 patients from 485 hospitals were analyzed. There was a decrease in the proportion of eligible patients not treated with reperfusion (6.2% versus 3.3%) and treated with fibrinolytic therapy (13.4% versus 7.0%). Median time from symptom onset to first medical contact was unchanged (≈50 minutes). Use of prehospital ECGs increased (45% versus 71%). All major reperfusion times improved: median first medical contact‐to‐device for emergency medical systems transport to percutaneous coronary intervention–capable hospitals (93 to 84 minutes), first door‐to‐device for transfers for primary percutaneous coronary intervention (130 to 112 minutes), and door‐in–door‐out at non–percutaneous coronary intervention–capable hospitals (76 to 62 minutes) (all P<0.001 over 5 years). Rates of cardiogenic shock and cardiac arrest, and overall in‐hospital mortality increased (5.7% to 6.3%). Adjusted mortality excluding patients with known cardiac arrest decreased by 14% at 3 years and 25% at 5 years (P<0.001).ConclusionsQuality of care for patients with ST‐segment–elevation myocardial infarction improved over time in Mission: Lifeline, including increased use of reperfusion therapy and faster times‐to‐treatment. In‐hospital mortality improved for patients without cardiac arrest but did not appear to improve overall as the number of these high‐risk patients increased.

Abstract 16902: The Effect of Kidney Function on Antithrombotic Regimen Among Patients With Atrial Fibrillation and Acute Myocardial Infarction: Insights From the National Cardiovascular Disease Registry’s Acute Coronary Treatment and Intervention Outcomes Network Registry

Introduction: The impact of kidney function in selecting antithrombotic therapy at hospital discharge for patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) who survive an acute myocardial infarction (AMI) is uncertain. Hypothesis: We hypothesized that kidney dysfunction is associated with decreased oral anticoagulant (OAC) use in AF patients who survive AMI. Methods: We studied 30,308 AF patients at 791 hospitals who survived AMI and were hospitalized between January 2015 and December 2017 (Acute Coronary Treatment and Intervention Outcomes Network Registry). We separated patients into 4 mutually exclusive groups: triple antithrombotic therapy (TAT), dual-antiplatelet therapy (DAPT), dual antithrombotic therapy excluding DAPT (DAT), and single therapy. Logistic regression was used to explore the trend for each antithrombotic strategy across CKD stage. Results: Of the 30,308 patients included in this analysis, 6,618 were on TAT (22%), 12,920 on DAPT (43%), 6,148 on DAT (20%), and 4,622 were on single therapy (15%). Overall, 46% of patients were discharged on an OAC (warfarin 22%; apixaban 14%; rivaroxaban 8%; dabigatran 2%). Patients with higher CHA 2 DS 2 -VASC scores (≥4) were more likely to be discharged on oral anticoagulation, except patients with GFR &lt; 15 ml/min/1.73m 2 . Compared to patients with normal kidney function, patients with GFR &lt; 30 ml/min/1.73m 2 had lower rates of TAT use (23% vs. 18%) despite higher warfarin use (20% vs. 27%). Within each antithrombotic discharge strategy, there was no significant trend across GFR strata among patients with in-hospital PCI ( Figure ). Conclusion: Significant heterogeneity in antithrombotic discharge strategy was seen among AF patients who survived AMI, however, the trend of each strategy across CKD stage was not significant among patients with in-hospital PCI. More research is needed to understand whether a particular antithrombotic strategy has improved outcomes in this population.

Highlights From the Circulation Family of Journals.

Highlights From the Circulation Family of Journals.

Medication Administration Delays in Non-ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction: Analysis of 1002 Patients Admitted to an Academic Medical Center.

Our goal was to assess adherence to American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association guideline-based medical therapy in patients admitted with type I non-ST elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) and to determine factors associated with medication administration delay. We performed a retrospective analysis using data from the Acute Coronary Treatment and Intervention Outcomes Network (ACTION) Registry. Baseline patient demographics, 12-lead electrocardiogram (ECG) findings, laboratory values, medications administered and the time they were administered, and in-hospital clinical outcomes were collected. Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events risk scores were calculated for all patients. We included 1002 patients admitted from the emergency department with a type I NSTEMI. A total of 802 (80%) patients received appropriate initial therapy consisting of therapeutic anticoagulation with heparin and dual antiplatelet therapy. Of the 200 (20%) patients who did not receive therapy, documentation in the chart regarding possible contraindications for administration of the medications was missing in up to half. Female sex, older age, a normal initial ECG, and prolonged time spent in the emergency department were predictors of significant delay in receiving guideline-based medications, while an elevated initial troponin was a predictor of faster medication administration. Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events risk scores had no association with the timing of medication administration. In conclusion, 20% of NSTEMI patients did not receive American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association guideline-based medical therapy. Delay in medication administration was significant for women, older individuals, and patients who did not have ischemic findings on the initial ECG.

Risk Score to Predict Need for Intensive Care in Initially Hemodynamically Stable Adults With Non-ST-Segment-Elevation Myocardial Infarction.

BackgroundIntensive care unit (ICU) use for initially stable patients presenting with non–ST‐segment–elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) varies widely across hospitals and minimally correlates with severity of illness. We aimed to develop a bedside risk score to assist in identifying high‐risk patients with NSTEMI for ICU admission.Methods and ResultsUsing the Acute Coronary Treatment and Intervention Outcomes Network (ACTION) Registry linked to Medicare data, we identified patients with NSTEMI aged ≥65 years without cardiogenic shock or cardiac arrest on presentation. Complications requiring ICU care were defined as subsequent development of cardiac arrest, shock, high‐grade atrioventricular block, respiratory failure, stroke, or death during the index hospitalization. We developed and validated a model and integer risk score (Acute Coronary Treatment and Intervention Outcomes Network (ACTION) ICU risk score) that uses variables present at hospital admission to predict requirement for ICU care. Of 29 973 patients with NSTEMI, 4282 (14%) developed a complication requiring ICU‐level care, yet 12 879 (43%) received care in an ICU. Signs or symptoms of heart failure, initial heart rate, initial systolic blood pressure, initial troponin, initial serum creatinine, prior revascularization, chronic lung disease, ST‐segment depression, and age had statistically significant associations with requirement for ICU care after adjusting for other risk factors. The ACTION ICU risk score had a C‐statistic of 0.72. It identified 11% of patients as having very high risk (>30%) of developing complications requiring ICU care and 49% as having low likelihood (<10%) of requiring an ICU.ConclusionsThe ACTION ICU risk score quantifies the risk of initially stable patients with NSTEMI developing a complication requiring ICU care, and could be used to more effectively allocate limited ICU resources.

Taking the Reins on Systems of Care for ST-Segment-Elevation Myocardial Infarction Patients: A Report From the American Heart Association Mission: Lifeline Program.

Early success with regionalization of ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) care has led many states to adopt statewide prehospital STEMI hospital destination policies, allowing emergency medical services to bypass non-percutaneous coronary intervention-capable hospitals. The association between adoption of these policies and patterns of care among STEMI patients is unknown. Using data from January 1, 2013, to December 31, 2014, from the National Cardiovascular Data Registry and Acute Coronary Treatment and Intervention Outcomes Network Registry, 6 states with bypass policies (cases included Delaware, Iowa, Maryland, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, and Massachusetts) were matched to 6 states without bypass policies (controls included South Carolina, Minnesota, Virginia, Texas, New York, and Connecticut) a priori on region, hospital density, and percent state participation in the registry. Using the matched sample, logistic regression models were adjusted for patient- and state-level characteristics. Outcomes were receipt of reperfusion and receipt of timely percutaneous coronary intervention. Our study cohort included 19 287 patients at 379 sites across 12 states. Patients from states with hospital destination policies were similar in age, sex, and comorbidities to patients from states without such policies. After adjustment for patient- and state-level characteristics, 57.9% (95% confidence intervals, 53.2%-62.5%) of patients living in states with hospital destination policies when compared with 47.5% (95% confidence intervals, 43.4%-51.7%) living in states without hospital destination policies received primary percutaneous coronary intervention within their relevant guideline-recommended time from first medical contact. Statewide adoption of STEMI hospital destination policies allowing emergency medical services to bypass non-percutaneous coronary intervention-capable facilities is associated with significantly faster treatment times for patients with STEMI.

Improvement of Door-to-Electrocardiogram Time Using the First-Nurse Role in the ED Setting

IntroductionThis quality improvement project compared door-to-electrocardiogram (ECG) times for patients presenting with symptoms suggestive of acute coronary syndrome within a community hospital emergency department before and after first-nurse (emergency nurse stationed in the ED waiting room) training. MethodDoor-to-ECG time was compared before and after the educational intervention using Acute Coronary Treatment and Intervention Outcomes Network (ACTION) registry data reported by the facility. ResultsStatistical significance was not achieved using a 2-group t-test. However, when comparing monthly means, data trend lines showed favorable improvement for door-to-ECG time after the intervention. DiscussionLimitations included using only those patients in the ACTION registry and not accounting for RN turnover with first-nurse education. Future studies should focus on all patients presenting with symptoms of acute coronary syndrome as well as other patients presenting with time-sensitive needs to determine the efficacy of the first-nurse role.Unlabelled Box

Contemporary Patterns of Early Coronary Angiography Use in Patients With Non–ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction in the United States: Insights From the National Cardiovascular Data Registry Acute Coronary Treatment and Intervention Outcomes Network Registry

ObjectivesThe study sought to characterize patient- and hospital-level variation in early angiography use among non–ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) patients. BackgroundContemporary implementation of guideline recommendations for early angiography use in NSTEMI patients in the United States have not been described. MethodsThe study analyzed NSTEMI patients included in ACTION (Acute Coronary Treatment and Intervention Outcomes Network) registry (2012 to 2014) who underwent in-hospital angiography. Timing of angiography was categorized as early (≤24 h) vs. delayed (>24 h). The study evaluated factors associated with early angiography, hospital-level variation in early angiography use, and the relationship with quality-of-care measures. ResultsA total of 79,760 of 138,688 (57.5%) patients underwent early angiography. Factors most strongly associated with delayed angiography included weekend or holiday presentation, lower initial troponin ratio values, higher initial creatinine values, heart failure on presentation, and older age. Median hospital-level use of early angiography was 58.5% with wide variation across hospitals (21.7% to 100.0%). Patient characteristics did not differ substantially across hospitals grouped by tertiles of early angiography use (low, middle, and high). Hospitals in the highest tertile tended to more commonly use guideline-recommended medications and had higher defect-free care quality scores. ConclusionsIn contemporary U.S. practice, high-risk clinical characteristics were associated with lower use of early angiography in NSTEMI patients; hospital-level use of early angiography varied widely despite few differences in case mix. Hospitals that most commonly utilized early angiography also had higher quality-of-care metrics, highlighting the need for improved NSTEMI guideline adherence.

Precatheterization Use of P2Y12 Inhibitors in Non-ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction Patients Undergoing Early Cardiac Catheterization and In-Hospital Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting: Insights From the National Cardiovascular Data Registry®.

BackgroundCurrent guidelines recommend early P2Y12 inhibitor administration in non‐ST‐elevation myocardial infarction, but it is unclear if precatheterization use is associated with longer delays to coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) or higher risk of post‐CABG bleeding and transfusion. This study examines the patterns and outcomes of precatheterization P2Y12 inhibitor use in non‐ST‐elevation myocardial infarction patients who undergo CABG.Methods and ResultsRetrospective analysis was done of 20 304 non‐ST‐elevation myocardial infarction patients in the ACTION (Acute Coronary Treatment and Intervention Outcomes Network) Registry (2009–2014) who underwent catheterization within 24 hours of admission and CABG during the index hospitalization. Using inverse probability‐weighted propensity adjustment, we compared time from catheterization to CABG, post‐CABG bleeding, and transfusion rates between patients who did and did not receive precatheterization P2Y12 inhibitors. Among study patients, 32.9% received a precatheterization P2Y12 inhibitor (of these, 2.2% were given ticagrelor and 3.7% prasugrel). Time from catheterization to CABG was longer among patients who received precatheterization P2Y12 inhibitor (median 69.9 hours [25th, 75th percentiles 28.2, 115.8] versus 43.5 hours [21.0, 71.8], P<0.0001), longer for patients treated with prasugrel (median 114.4 hours [66.5, 155.5]) or ticagrelor (90.4 hours [48.7, 124.5]) compared with clopidogrel (69.3 [27.5, 114.6], P<0.0001). Precatheterization P2Y12 inhibitor use was associated with a higher risk of post‐CABG major bleeding (75.7% versus 73.4%, adjusted odds ratio 1.33, 95% confidence interval 1.22‐1.45, P<0.0001) and transfusion (47.6% versus 35.7%, adjusted odds ratio 1.51, 95% confidence interval 1.41‐1.62, P<0001); these relationships did not differ among patients treated with clopidogrel, prasugrel, or ticagrelor.ConclusionsPrecatheterization P2Y12 inhibitor use occurs commonly among non‐ST‐elevation myocardial infarction patients who undergo early catheterization and in‐hospital CABG. Despite longer delays to surgery, the majority of pretreated patients proceed to CABG <3 days postcatheterization. Precatheterization P2Y12 inhibitor use is associated with higher risks of postoperative bleeding and transfusion.

Contemporary risk model for inhospital major bleeding for patients with acute myocardial infarction: The acute coronary treatment and intervention outcomes network (ACTION) registry®–Get With The Guidelines (GWTG)®

Major bleeding is a frequent complication for patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) and is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. To develop a contemporary model for inhospital major bleeding that can both support clinical decision-making and serve as a foundation for assessing hospital quality. An inhospital major bleeding model was developed using the Acute Coronary Treatment and Intervention Outcomes Network Registry-Get With the Guidelines (ACTION Registry-GWTG) database. Patients hospitalized with AMI between January 1, 2012 and December 31, 2013 across 657 hospitals were used to create a derivation cohort (n=144,800) and a validation cohort (n=96,684). Multivariable hierarchal logistic regression was used to identify significant predictors of major bleeding. A simplified risk score was created to enable prospective risk stratification for clinical care. The rate of major bleeding in the overall population was 7.53%. There were 8 significant, independent factors associated with major bleeding: presentation after cardiac arrest (OR 2.99 [2.77-3.22]); presentation in cardiogenic shock (OR 2.22 [2.05-2.40]); STEMI (OR 1.72 [1.65-1.80]); presentation in heart failure (OR 1.55 [1.47-1.63]); baseline hemoglobin less than 12 g/dL (1.55 [1.48-1.63]); heart rate (per 10 beat per minute increase) (OR 1.13 [1.12-1.14]); weight (per 10 kilogram decrease) (OR 1.12 [1.11-1.14]); creatinine clearance (per 5-mL decrease) (OR 1.07 [1.07-1.08]). The model discriminated well in the derivation (C-statistic = 0.74) and validation (C-statistic = 0.74) cohorts. In the validation cohort, a risk score for major bleeding corresponded well with observed bleeding: very low risk (2.2%), low risk (5.1%), moderate risk (10.1%), high risk (16.3%), and very high risk (25.2%). The new ACTION Registry-GWTG inhospital major bleeding risk model and risk score offer a robust, parsimonious, and contemporary risk-adjustment method to support clinical decision-making and enable hospital quality assessment. Strategies to mitigate risk should be developed and tested as a means to lower costs and improve outcomes in an era of alternative payment models.

Selection of Stent Type in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation Presenting With Acute Myocardial Infarction: An Analysis From the ACTION (Acute Coronary Treatment and Intervention Outcomes Network) Registry-Get With the Guidelines.

BackgroundPatients receiving oral anticoagulation in addition to dual‐antiplatelet therapy are known to be at high risk for bleeding events; thus, the selection of a drug‐eluting stent (DES) versus a bare metal stent (BMS) can have important implications for patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) presenting with acute myocardial infarction (MI).Methods and ResultsFrom the National Cardiovascular Data Registry ACTION (Acute Coronary Treatment and Intervention Outcomes Network) Registry—Get With the Guidelines, we identified 14 427 AF patients presenting with acute MI undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention from 2008 to 2014. Temporal trends and hospital variation in DES use were examined, as were patterns of use by stroke risk (CHA2DS2‐VASc) and bleeding risk ATRIA (Anticoagulation and Risk Factors in Atrial Fibrillation). Among patients with linked Medicare data (n=2844), multivariable Cox regression modeling was used to compare risks for a composite outcome (all‐cause mortality, readmission for stroke, or MI), readmission for stroke, revascularization, and major bleeding at 1 year. A DES was used in 8414 (58.9%) MI patients with AF, increasing from 47.1% in 2008 to 67.9% in 2014, with wide variation among hospitals. DES placement was more common than BMS placement among patients at high stroke risk (CHA2DS2‐VASc ≥2) and high bleeding risk (ATRIA ≥4). Although aspirin and a P2Y12 inhibitor were prescribed for >95% of all patients regardless of stent type at discharge, warfarin was prescribed less frequently among patients receiving a DES than a BMS (31% versus 39%, P<0.001). The composite outcome was similar between patients with a DES or BMS at 1 year (22% versus 26%; adjusted hazard ratio: 0.88; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.76–1.03).ConclusionsUse of DESs among MI patients with AF has increased over time, but substantial hospital‐level variation was observed. Patients with AF meeting indications for anticoagulation are more likely to receive a DES than a BMS, even among those at high predicted risk of both stroke and bleeding.

Prior beta blockers use is independently associated with increased inpatient mortality in patients presenting with acute myocardial infarction

BackgroundBeta blockers (BBs) are recommended for patients presenting with acute myocardial infarction. However, the effects of prior BBs use on inpatient mortality in patients presenting with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) are unknown. MethodsThis was a retrospective cohort study of patients presenting with AMI in Florida Hospital Orlando from January 1, 2013 to December 31, 2014. Data were collected prospectively, as part of the Acute Coronary Treatment and Intervention Outcomes Network (ACTION) Registry. Results1128 patients were included in the analysis, with 354 (31.4%) patients on home BBs and 774 (68.6%) not on home BBs on presentation. Patients in prior BBs group were older, had higher incidence of multiple comorbidities, and were more likely to take cardiovascular medications. During hospitalization, Patients in prior BBs group were more likely to develop decompensated heart failure (9.9% vs. 3.6%, P<0.001), less likely to have STEMI (33.9% vs. 54.4%, P<0.001), and subsequently less PCI (73.2% vs. 81.3%, P=0.002), but higher inpatient mortality (8.8% vs. 4.8%, P=0.009). In multivariable logistic regression analysis, prior BBs use was independently associated with increased inpatient mortality (adjusted OR 3.15, 95% CI 1.44-6.87, P=0.004), as well as in GRACE model (adjusted ratio=1.83, 95% CI 1.01-3.34, P<0.047). However, prior BBs use did not contribute significantly to predict inpatient mortality on the basis of GRACE model in terms of discrimination and calibration. ConclusionsPrior BBs use was independently associated with increased inpatient mortality, and should be considered a high risk marker for patients presenting with acute myocardial infarction.

Use of Prescription Smoking Cessation Medications After Myocardial Infarction Among Older Patients in Community Practice

This population-based study uses the Acute Coronary Treatment and Intervention Outcomes Network Registry to evaluate the prevalence of smoking cessation medication use among patients following myocardial infarction.

Implications of the PEGASUS-TIMI 54 trial for US clinical practice

ObjectivesThis study aims to determine the proportion of real-world patients with myocardial infarction (MI) who would have been eligible for the PEGASUS-TIMI 54 (Prevention of Cardiovascular Events in Patients with...

Association of remote ischemic peri-conditioning with reduced incidence of clinical heart failure after primary percutaneous coronary intervention.

Clinical heart failure (HF) occurs frequently after ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), and is associated with increased mortality. We assessed the impact of remote ischemic peri-conditioning (RIPC) during inter-facility air medical transport of STEMI patients on clinical HF following primary percutaneous coronary intervention (pPCI). Data from Acute Coronary Treatment and Intervention Outcomes Network Registry®-Get With the Guidelines™ (ACTION Registry-GWTG) from two PCI-hospitals that are utilizing RIPC during inter-facility helicopter transport of STEMI patients for pPCI between March, 2013 and September, 2015 were used for this study. The analyses were limited to inter-facility STEMI patients transported by helicopter with LVEF <55% after pPCI. The outcome measures were occurrence of clinical HF and serum level of brain-type natriuretic peptide (BNP). Out of the 150 STEMI patients in this analysis, 92 patients received RIPC and 58 did not. The RIPC and non-RIPC groups were generally similar in demographic and clinical characteristics except for lower incidence of cardiac arrest in the RIPC group (3/92 [3.3%] versus 13/58 [22.4%], p=0.002). STEMI patients who received RIPC were less likely to have in-hospital clinical HF compared to patients who did not receive RIPC (3/92 [3.3%] versus 7/58 [12.1%]; adjusted OR=0.22, 95% CI 0.05-0.92, p=0.038) after adjusting for baseline differences. In subgroup analysis, RIPC was associated with lower BNP (123 [interquartile range, 17.0-310] versus 319 [interquartile range, 106-552], p=0.029). RIPC applied during inter-facility air transport of STEMI patients for pPCI is associated with reduced incidence of clinical HF and serum BNP.

Reassessment of Cardiac Function and Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator Use Among Medicare Patients With Low Ejection Fraction After Myocardial Infarction.

Guidelines recommend that patients with low ejection fraction (EF) after myocardial infarction (MI) have their EF reassessed 40 days after MI for implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) candidacy. This study examines rates of EF reassessment and their association with 1-year ICD implantation in post-MI patients with low EF. We examined rates of postdischarge EF reassessment and ICD implantation among 10 289 Medicare-insured patients ≥65 years of age with an EF≤35% during the index MI admission from January 2007 through September 2010 in ACTION Registry-GWTG (Acute Coronary Treatment and Intervention Outcomes Network Registry-Get With The Guidelines). Multivariable Cox models tested the association between time-dependent EF reassessment and 1-year ICD implantation, stratified by revascularization status during the index MI admission. Among patients with EF ≤35% during the index MI admission, 66.8% (95% confidence interval [CI], 65.9-67.8) had EF reassessment within the next year. Revascularized patients were more likely to have EF reassessment (76.9% [95% CI, 75.8-78.0)] versus 53.7% [95% CI, 52.2-55.2]; P<0.001) and had shorter times to EF reassessment (median, 67 versus 84 days; P<0.001) than nonrevascularized patients. Among patients with EF reassessment, only 11% received an ICD within 1 year. Reassessment of EF was associated with a higher likelihood of ICD implantation for both revascularized (unadjusted, 12.1% versus 2.4%, P<0.001; adjusted hazard ratio, 10.6, 95% CI, 7.7-14.8) and nonrevascularized (unadjusted, 10.0% versus 1.7%, P<0.001; adjusted hazard ratio, 6.1, 95% CI, 4.1-9.2) patients. In US practice, EF reassessments are commonly performed among patients with MI with an initially reduced EF. Although 1-year EF reassessment is associated with increased likelihood of ICD implantation, 1-year ICD implantation rates remain very low even among patients with EF reassessment, regardless of revascularization status.