-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Although chronic lung disease (CLD) is common among patients with myocardial infarction (MI), little is known about the influence of CLD on patient management and outcomes following MI.
Using the National Cardiovascular Data Registry's ACTION Registry-GWTG, demographics, clinical characteristics, treatments, processes of care, and in-hospital adverse events after acute MI were compared between patients with (n = 22,624) and without (n = 136,266) CLD. Multivariable adjustment was performed to determine the independent association of CLD with treatments and adverse events.
CLD (17.0% of non-ST-elevation MI [NSTEMI] and 10.1% of ST-elevation MI [STEMI] patients) was associated with older age, female sex, and a greater burden of comorbidities. Among NSTEMI patients, those with CLD were less likely to undergo cardiac catheterization, percutaneous coronary intervention, and coronary artery bypass graft compared to those without; in contrast, no differences were seen in invasive therapies for STEMI patients with or without CLD. Multivariable-adjusted risk of major bleeding was significantly increased in CLD patients with NSTEMI (13.0% vs 8.1%, OR(adj) = 1.27, 95% CI = 1.20-1.34, P < .001) and STEMI (16.0% vs 10.5%, OR(adj) = 1.19, 95% CI = 1.10-1.29, P < .001). In NSTEMI, CLD was associated with a higher risk of inhospital mortality (OR(adj) = 1.21, 95% CI = 1.11-1.33); in STEMI no association between CLD and mortality was seen (OR(adj) = 1.05, 95% CI = 0.95-1.17).
CLD is common among patients with MI and is independently associated with an increased risk for major bleeding. In NSTEMI, CLD is also associated with receiving less revascularization and with increased in-hospital mortality. Special attention should be given to this high-risk subgroup for the prevention and management of complications after MI.
American heart journal 01/2013; 165(1):43-9. · 4.65 Impact Factor
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Previous studies have demonstrated that patients with COPD are at higher risk for death after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), but other clinical outcomes and possible associations with adverse events have not been described.
Using waves 1 through 5 (1999-2006) of the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Dynamic Registry, patients with COPD (n = 860) and without COPD (n = 10,048) were compared. Baseline demographics, angiographic characteristics, and in-hospital and 1-year adverse events were compared.
Patients with COPD were older (mean age 66.8 vs 63.2 years, P < .001), more likely to be women, and more likely to have a history of diabetes, prior myocardial infarction, peripheral arterial disease, renal disease, and smoking. Patients with COPD also had a lower mean ejection fraction (49.1% vs 53.0%, P < .001) and a greater mean number of significant lesions (3.2 vs 3.0, P = .006). Rates of in-hospital death (2.2% vs 1.1%, P = .003) and major entry site complications (6.6% vs 4.2%, P < .001) were higher in pulmonary patients. At discharge, pulmonary patients were significantly less likely to be prescribed aspirin (92.4% vs 95.3%, P < .001), β-blockers (55.7% vs 76.2%, P < .001), and statins (60.0% vs 66.8%, P < .001). After adjustment, patients with COPD had significantly increased risk of death (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.30, 95% CI = 1.01-1.67) and repeat revascularization (HR = 1.22, 95% CI = 1.02-1.46) at 1 year, compared with patients without COPD.
COPD is associated with higher mortality rates and repeat revascularization within 1 year after PCI. These higher rates of adverse outcomes may be associated with lower rates of guideline-recommended class 1 medications prescribed at discharge.
Chest 04/2011; 140(3):604-10. · 5.25 Impact Factor
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: The following Point/Counterpoint articles were derived from a debate presentation sponsored by the American Society for Preventive Cardiology at the March 2010 meeting of the American Heart Association Council on Epidemiology and Prevention, titled "Should We Focus on Novel Risk Marker and Screening Tests to Better Predict and Prevent Cardiovascular Disease?" Dr. James de Lemos presented the pro side, titled "Novel Risk Markers and Screening Tests Will Improve the Prediction and Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease," and Dr. Donald Lloyd-Jones advocated the con side, titled "Better Implementation of Existing Knowledge Will Save More Lives Than All of the Novel Biomarkers in the World." The following articles include points from the debate, rebuttal, and questions raised by the audience. We thank all authors for sharing this debate with the readership.
Preventive Cardiology 01/2010; 13(4):152-9.
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Although previous studies have demonstrated that Hispanic patients have a higher cardiovascular risk profile than Caucasians and present at a younger age for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), limited studies exist examining the outcomes of Hispanics after PCI and potential explanations for differences noted. Using patients from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Dynamic Registry waves 1 to 5 (1997 to 2006), demographic features, angiographic data, and 1-year outcomes of Hispanic patients (n = 542) versus Caucasian patients (n = 1,357) undergoing PCI were evaluated. Compared to Caucasians, Hispanic patients were younger and had more hypertension and diabetes mellitus, including more insulin-treated diabetes mellitus. Although mean lesion length was longer in Hispanics (15.4 vs 14.1 mm, p <0.001), there were no differences in the number of significant lesions or in the use of drug-eluting stents. At follow-up, Hispanics were more likely to report recent anginal symptoms but had a similar incidence of 1-year hospitalizations for angina. Adjusted 1-year hazard ratios for adverse events for Hispanics versus Caucasians revealed lower rates of coronary artery bypass graft surgery (hazard ratio 0.43, confidence interval 0.22 to 0.85, p = 0.02) and a trend toward lower rates of repeat revascularization (hazard ratio 0.76, confidence interval 0.57 to 1.03, p = 0.08). In conclusion, despite the presence of diabetes in almost 50% of Hispanic patients and longer lesions than in Caucasians, Hispanic patients were less likely to undergo coronary artery bypass graft surgery 1 year after PCI and had a trend toward lower rates of repeat revascularization.
The American journal of cardiology 10/2009; 104(6):775-9. · 3.58 Impact Factor
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Women have worse morbidity, mortality, and health-related quality-of-life outcomes associated with coronary artery disease (CAD) compared with men. This may be related to underutilization of drug therapies, such as aspirin, beta-blockers, angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors, or statins. No studies have sought to describe the relationship of gender with adverse reactions to drug therapy (ADRs) for CAD in clinical practice.
The aim of this study was to determine the prevalence of ADRs associated with common CAD drug therapies in women and men in clinical practice.
In a cohort of consecutive outpatients with CAD, detailed chart abstraction was performed to determine the use of aspirin, beta-blocker, ACE inhibitor, and statin therapy, as well as the ADRs reported for these treatments. Baseline clinical characteristics were also determined to identify the independent association of gender with use of standard drug treatments for CAD.
Consecutive patients with CAD (153 men, 151 women) were included in the study. Women and men were observed to have a similar prevalence of cardiac risk factors and comorbidities, except that men had significantly higher prevalence of atrial fibrillation (30 [19.6%] men vs 15 [9.9%] women; P = 0.03) and significantly lower mean (SD) high-density lipoprotein cholesterol concentrations (45 [16] mg/dL for men vs 55 [19] mg/dL for women; P < 0.001). No significant differences were observed between the sexes in the prevalence of ADRs; however, significantly fewer women than men were treated with statins (118 [78.1%] vs 139 [90.8%], respectively; P = 0.003). After adjusting for clinical characteristics, women were also found to be less likely than men to receive aspirin (odds ratio [OR] = 0.164; 95% CI, 0.083-0.322; P = 0.001) and beta-blockers (OR = 0.184; 95% CI, 0.096-0.351; P = 0.001).
Women and men experienced a similar prevalence of ADRs in the treatment of CAD; however, women were significantly less likely to be treated with aspirin, beta-blockers, and statins than were their male counterparts. To optimize care for women with CAD, further study is needed to identify the cause of this gender disparity in therapeutic drug use.
Gender Medicine 03/2008; 5(1):53-61. · 2.10 Impact Factor
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Diabetes mellitus (DM) is a common comorbidity among patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS). The frequency with which physicians assess diabetic patients' glycemic control during an ACS hospitalization is not known and may represent an opportunity for quality improvement.
This study describes the proportion of diabetic patients who had an assessment of their glycemic control (HbA1c) at the time of an ACS hospitalization. Secondary analyses examined characteristics associated with HbA1c assessment and physicians' responses to poor glycemic control.
Among 968 enrolled patients with ACS, 235 (24%) had DM. HbA1c values were known or obtained in 162 (69%) patients; 60% were poorly controlled (HbA1c > 7). Older patients were less likely to have an HbA1c assessment (relative risk [RR] = 0.81 [95% CI 0.64-1.01] for patients 60-69 years and RR = 0.71 [95% CI 0.58-0.88] for those > or = 70 years compared to patients < 60 years, P = .004). Among patients without an HbA1c, only consultation by an endocrinologist was independently associated with obtaining a subsequent assessment (RR 1.60, 95% CI 1.33-1.92, P < .001). Among those with an elevated HbA1c, 42% with an HbA1c of 7 to 9 and 69% of those with HbA1c > 9 had their diabetic regimen increased.
Almost one third of diabetic patients with ACS do not have HbA1c assessment at discharge; particularly older patients and those not evaluated by an endocrinologist. Although > 60% of those assessed had poor control, many did not have adjustments of their diabetic therapy. Assessment of diabetes represents an opportunity to improve the quality of care for diabetic patients with ACS.
American heart journal 12/2006; 152(6):1022-7. · 4.65 Impact Factor
