2023
Complex Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Outcomes in Older Adults
Hanna J, Wang S, Kochar A, Park D, Damluji A, Henry G, Ahmad Y, Curtis J, Nanna M. Complex Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Outcomes in Older Adults. Journal Of The American Heart Association 2023, 12: e029057. PMID: 37776222, PMCID: PMC10727245, DOI: 10.1161/jaha.122.029057.Peer-Reviewed Original ResearchConceptsNoncomplex percutaneous coronary interventionsComplex percutaneous coronary interventionStable ischemic heart diseasePercutaneous coronary interventionIschemic heart diseaseTarget lesion revascularizationEvent-free survivalHeart diseaseOlder adultsCause deathLesion revascularizationClinical characteristicsElective percutaneous coronary interventionPercutaneous coronary intervention outcomesWorse event-free survivalMedical therapy useCox regression modelLarge health systemNoncardiac comorbiditiesRevascularization riskCoronary interventionTherapy useClinical outcomesDisease featuresLower risk
2021
Comparison of Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Contemporary U.S. Practice With ISCHEMIA Trial Population
Chatterjee S, Fanaroff AC, Parzynski C, Curtis J, Kolansky DM, Maddox TM, Mukherjee D, Yeh RW, Giri J. Comparison of Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Contemporary U.S. Practice With ISCHEMIA Trial Population. JACC Cardiovascular Interventions 2021, 14: 2344-2349. PMID: 34736733, DOI: 10.1016/j.jcin.2021.08.047.Peer-Reviewed Original ResearchMeSH KeywordsCross-Sectional StudiesHumansIschemiaMyocardial IschemiaPercutaneous Coronary InterventionTreatment OutcomeConceptsStable ischemic heart diseasePercutaneous coronary interventionISCHEMIA trialSIHD patientsCoronary interventionNational Cardiovascular Data Registry CathPCI RegistryStudy periodHospital mortality rateHigh-risk featuresProportion of patientsTrial inclusion criteriaComparison of patientsIschemic heart diseaseCross-sectional analysisIschemic burdenMedian hospitalAngina symptomsCathPCI RegistryTrial populationComparator groupEnrollment criteriaMyocardial infarctionHeart diseaseU.S. patientsInclusion criteria
2020
Comparison of Mortality and Readmission in Non-Ischemic Versus Ischemic Cardiomyopathy After Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator Implantation
Higgins AY, Bjerre J, Parzynski CS, Minges KE, Ahmad T, Desai NR, Enriquez A, Spatz ES, Friedman DJ, Curtis JP, Hlatky MA, Freeman JV. Comparison of Mortality and Readmission in Non-Ischemic Versus Ischemic Cardiomyopathy After Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator Implantation. The American Journal Of Cardiology 2020, 133: 116-125. PMID: 32862971, DOI: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2020.07.035.Peer-Reviewed Original ResearchConceptsNon-ischemic cardiomyopathyImplantable cardioverter defibrillator implantationCardioverter-defibrillator implantationICM patientsIschemic cardiomyopathyNational Cardiovascular Data Registry ICD RegistryCox proportional hazards regression modelPrimary prevention ICD implantationLeft ventricular ejection fractionProportional hazards regression modelsPrimary prevention ICDsRetrospective cohort studyVentricular ejection fractionKaplan-Meier curvesHazards regression modelsRisk of mortalityComparison of mortalityMedian followCohort studyICD implantationEjection fractionHeart failureHospital readmissionICD RegistryPatient subgroupsStent selection among patients with chronic kidney disease: Results from the NCDR CathPCI Registry
Feldman DA, Shroff AR, Bao H, Curtis JP, Minges KE, Ardati AK. Stent selection among patients with chronic kidney disease: Results from the NCDR CathPCI Registry. Catheterization And Cardiovascular Interventions 2020, 96: 1213-1221. PMID: 31909543, DOI: 10.1002/ccd.28698.Peer-Reviewed Original ResearchConceptsChronic kidney diseasePercutaneous coronary interventionST-elevation myocardial infarctionDES usageBare metal stentsNCDR CathPCI RegistryCathPCI RegistryRenal functionKidney diseasePCI casesElective percutaneous coronary interventionAdvanced renal dysfunctionNormal renal functionCoronary stent placementCKD stageRenal dysfunctionCoronary interventionUse of DESMyocardial infarctionStent placementSubgroup analysisStent usageMetal stentsPatientsStent selection
2019
Analysis of Temporal Trends and Variation in the Use of Defibrillation Testing in Contemporary Practice
Borne RT, Randolph T, Wang Y, Curtis JP, Peterson PN, Masoudi FA, Sandhu A, Zipse MM, Thomas K, Kutyifa V, Desai NR, Cha YM, Hsu JC, Russo AM. Analysis of Temporal Trends and Variation in the Use of Defibrillation Testing in Contemporary Practice. JAMA Network Open 2019, 2: e1913553. PMID: 31626314, PMCID: PMC6813586, DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2019.13553.Peer-Reviewed Original ResearchConceptsNational Cardiovascular Data Registry ICD RegistryMedian odds ratioDefibrillation testingLow testing ratesTesting ratesHigher testing ratesICD RegistryFirst-time ICD implantationImplantable cardioverter defibrillator implantationMulticenter cross-sectional studyAdvanced heart failureCardioverter-defibrillator implantationIschemic heart diseaseCross-sectional studyICD implantationHeart failureICD placementVentricular arrhythmiasMean ageHeart diseaseVentricular tachycardiaOdds ratioHigher oddsMAIN OUTCOMEFirst calendar quarterValidating the use of registries and claims data to support randomized trials: Rationale and design of the Extending Trial-Based Evaluations of Medical Therapies Using Novel Sources of Data (EXTEND) Study
Strom JB, Tamez H, Zhao Y, Valsdottir LR, Curtis J, Brennan JM, Shen C, Popma JJ, Mauri L, Yeh RW. Validating the use of registries and claims data to support randomized trials: Rationale and design of the Extending Trial-Based Evaluations of Medical Therapies Using Novel Sources of Data (EXTEND) Study. American Heart Journal 2019, 212: 64-71. PMID: 30953936, PMCID: PMC6535119, DOI: 10.1016/j.ahj.2019.02.007.Peer-Reviewed Original ResearchConceptsMedical therapyDual Antiplatelet Therapy StudyEnd pointEnd-point eventsClinical trial programEfficacy of therapyPatient-level dataClinical trial dataHealth system dataUse of registriesNew medical treatmentsProcedural registryRandomized trialsClaims databasePatient populationNational registryAdministrative claimsOutcome dataMedical treatmentTrial programTrial dataRegistryTrial informationTherapy studiesTrial results
2017
Use of Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy Among Eligible Patients Receiving an Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator: Insights From the National Cardiovascular Data Registry Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator Registry
Marzec LN, Peterson PN, Bao H, Curtis JP, Masoudi FA, Varosy PD, Bradley SM. Use of Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy Among Eligible Patients Receiving an Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator: Insights From the National Cardiovascular Data Registry Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator Registry. JAMA Cardiology 2017, 2: 561-565. PMID: 28122073, PMCID: PMC5814986, DOI: 10.1001/jamacardio.2016.5388.Peer-Reviewed Original ResearchMeSH KeywordsAgedAged, 80 and overAtrial FibrillationBlack or African AmericanBundle-Branch BlockCardiac Resynchronization TherapyCardiac Resynchronization Therapy DevicesCerebrovascular DisordersCohort StudiesComorbidityDefibrillators, ImplantableDiabetes MellitusEthnicityFemaleHealth Facility SizeHeart FailureHospitalsHospitals, TeachingHumansHypertensionInsurance, HealthLung DiseasesMaleMedicaidMedicareMiddle AgedMortalityMyocardial IschemiaPractice Patterns, Physicians'RegistriesRegression AnalysisRetrospective StudiesUnited StatesWhite PeopleConceptsUse of CRTCardiac resynchronization therapyCRT-D useImplantable cardioverter defibrillatorGuideline-eligible patientsDevice implantationEligible patientsResynchronization therapyCardioverter defibrillatorNational Cardiovascular Data Registry Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator RegistryNational Cardiovascular Data Registry ICD RegistryHeart failure-related eventsImplantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator RegistryCRT-D groupMulticenter retrospective cohortRisk-standardized ratesHospital-level variationCRT-D devicesHierarchical multivariable modelNonprivate insuranceRetrospective cohortSelect patientsICD RegistryGuideline recommendationsICD placement
2004
Efficacy and safety of two unfractionated heparin dosing strategies with tenecteplase in acute myocardial infarction (results from Assessment of the Safety and Efficacy of a New Thrombolytic Regimens 2 and 3)
Curtis JP, Alexander JH, Huang Y, Wallentin L, Verheugt FW, Armstrong PW, Krumholz HM, Van de Werf F, Danays T, Cheeks M, Granger CB, Investigators A. Efficacy and safety of two unfractionated heparin dosing strategies with tenecteplase in acute myocardial infarction (results from Assessment of the Safety and Efficacy of a New Thrombolytic Regimens 2 and 3). The American Journal Of Cardiology 2004, 94: 279-283. PMID: 15276088, DOI: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2004.04.019.Peer-Reviewed Original ResearchMeSH KeywordsAgedConfidence IntervalsDose-Response Relationship, DrugDrug Administration ScheduleDrug Therapy, CombinationElectrocardiographyFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHeparin, Low-Molecular-WeightHumansIncidenceIntracranial HemorrhagesMaleMiddle AgedMultivariate AnalysisMyocardial InfarctionMyocardial IschemiaPartial Thromboplastin TimeProbabilityRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicRisk AssessmentSeverity of Illness IndexSurvival RateTenecteplaseThrombolytic TherapyTissue Plasminogen ActivatorTreatment OutcomeConceptsWeight-adjusted heparinST-elevation myocardial infarctionASSENT-3Myocardial infarctionASSENT-2Major bleedingIntracranial hemorrhageSmall doseFull-dose tenecteplaseLess major bleedingNew thrombolytic regimenOutcomes of patientsAcute myocardial infarctionPartial thromboplastin timeSimilar ratesRefractory ischemiaThrombolytic regimenRecurrent infarctionBaseline characteristicsHemorrhagic complicationsUnfractionated heparinThromboplastin timePatientsInfarctionTenecteplase