2020
Association of Use of an Intravascular Microaxial Left Ventricular Assist Device vs Intra-aortic Balloon Pump With In-Hospital Mortality and Major Bleeding Among Patients With Acute Myocardial Infarction Complicated by Cardiogenic Shock
Dhruva SS, Ross JS, Mortazavi BJ, Hurley NC, Krumholz HM, Curtis JP, Berkowitz A, Masoudi FA, Messenger JC, Parzynski CS, Ngufor C, Girotra S, Amin AP, Shah ND, Desai NR. Association of Use of an Intravascular Microaxial Left Ventricular Assist Device vs Intra-aortic Balloon Pump With In-Hospital Mortality and Major Bleeding Among Patients With Acute Myocardial Infarction Complicated by Cardiogenic Shock. JAMA 2020, 323: 734-745. PMID: 32040163, PMCID: PMC7042879, DOI: 10.1001/jama.2020.0254.Peer-Reviewed Original ResearchMeSH KeywordsAgedCause of DeathExtracorporeal Membrane OxygenationFemaleHeart ArrestHeart-Assist DevicesHemorrhageHospital MortalityHumansIntra-Aortic Balloon PumpingMaleMatched-Pair AnalysisMiddle AgedMyocardial InfarctionPercutaneous Coronary InterventionPropensity ScoreRegistriesRetrospective StudiesShock, CardiogenicST Elevation Myocardial InfarctionConceptsMicroaxial left ventricular assist deviceIntra-aortic balloon pumpLeft ventricular assist deviceAcute myocardial infarctionPercutaneous coronary interventionNational Cardiovascular Data RegistryCardiogenic shockHemodynamic supportMyocardial infarctionRegistry-based retrospective cohort studyCardiology-National Cardiovascular Data RegistryChest Pain-MI RegistryST-elevation myocardial infarctionMechanical circulatory support devicesGreater hemodynamic supportHospital major bleedingRetrospective cohort studyPropensity-matched pairsCirculatory support devicesVentricular assist deviceClinical laboratory dataHospital mortalityMajor bleedingHospital deathCohort study
2017
Seattle Heart Failure and Proportional Risk Models Predict Benefit From Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillators
Bilchick KC, Wang Y, Cheng A, Curtis JP, Dharmarajan K, Stukenborg GJ, Shadman R, Anand I, Lund LH, Dahlström U, Sartipy U, Maggioni A, Swedberg K, O’Conner C, Levy WC. Seattle Heart Failure and Proportional Risk Models Predict Benefit From Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillators. Journal Of The American College Of Cardiology 2017, 69: 2606-2618. PMID: 28545633, PMCID: PMC5502749, DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2017.03.568.Peer-Reviewed Original ResearchConceptsSeattle Heart Failure ModelSeattle Proportional Risk ModelNational Cardiovascular Data RegistryPrimary prevention ICDsHeart failureSudden deathCause mortalitySurvival benefitMultivariable Cox proportional hazards regressionCox proportional hazards regressionProportional riskProportional hazards regressionRecent clinical trialsHeart failure modelProportional risk modelControl patientsOverall survivalVentricular arrhythmiasHazards regressionICD benefitClinical trialsCardioverter defibrillatorLarge cohortHigh riskData registry
2016
Outcomes 1 Year After Implantable Cardioverter–Defibrillator Lead Abandonment Versus Explantation for Unused or Malfunctioning Leads
Zeitler EP, Wang Y, Dharmarajan K, Anstrom KJ, Peterson ED, Daubert JP, Curtis JP, Al-Khatib SM. Outcomes 1 Year After Implantable Cardioverter–Defibrillator Lead Abandonment Versus Explantation for Unused or Malfunctioning Leads. Circulation Arrhythmia And Electrophysiology 2016, 9: e003953. PMID: 27406605, PMCID: PMC4973616, DOI: 10.1161/circep.116.003953.Peer-Reviewed Original ResearchConceptsNational Cardiovascular Data Registry ICD RegistryLead explantationUpper extremity thrombosisProcedure-related complicationsImplantable cardioverter-defibrillator leadsOutcomes 1 yearLong-term safetyCardioverter-defibrillator leadsHospital complicationsHospital deathUrgent surgeryPulmonary embolismICD RegistryHospital eventsPostprocedure complicationsMortality riskPatientsICD leadPropensity scoreComplicationsExplantationLead abandonmentMalfunctioning leadsHigh rateComparative acuteImpact of Glycoprotein IIb/IIIa Inhibitors Use on Outcomes After Lower Extremity Endovascular Interventions From Nationwide Inpatient Sample (2006–2011)
Arora S, Panaich SS, Patel N, Patel NJ, Lahewala S, Thakkar B, Savani C, Jhamnani S, Singh V, Patel N, Patel S, Sonani R, Patel A, Tripathi B, Deshmukh A, Chothani A, Patel J, Bhatt P, Mohamad T, Remetz MS, Curtis JP, Attaran RR, Mena CI, Schreiber T, Grines C, Cleman M, Forrest JK, Badheka AO. Impact of Glycoprotein IIb/IIIa Inhibitors Use on Outcomes After Lower Extremity Endovascular Interventions From Nationwide Inpatient Sample (2006–2011). Catheterization And Cardiovascular Interventions 2016, 88: 605-616. PMID: 26914274, DOI: 10.1002/ccd.26452.Peer-Reviewed Original ResearchMeSH KeywordsAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAmputation, SurgicalCross-Sectional StudiesDatabases, FactualDrug CostsEndovascular ProceduresFemaleHospital CostsHospital MortalityHumansLimb SalvageLogistic ModelsLower ExtremityMaleMiddle AgedMultivariate AnalysisOdds RatioPeripheral Arterial DiseasePlatelet Aggregation InhibitorsPlatelet Glycoprotein GPIIb-IIIa ComplexPropensity ScoreRisk FactorsTime FactorsTreatment OutcomeUnited StatesYoung AdultConceptsGlycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitorsPeripheral endovascular interventionsHospital mortalityHospitalization costsEndovascular interventionGPI useAmputation rateUtilization Project Nationwide Inpatient Sample databaseTwo-level hierarchical multivariateIIb/IIIa inhibitorsNationwide Inpatient Sample databaseLower amputation ratesPaucity of dataHospital outcomesPostprocedural complicationsSecondary outcomesPropensity matchingStudy cohortHealthcare costsICD-9Multivariate analysisStudy outcomesSample databaseMortalityHierarchical multivariate
2015
Comparison of Inhospital Outcomes and Hospitalization Costs of Peripheral Angioplasty and Endovascular Stenting
Panaich SS, Arora S, Patel N, Patel NJ, Lahewala S, Solanki S, Manvar S, Savani C, Jhamnani S, Singh V, Patel SV, Thakkar B, Patel A, Deshmukh A, Chothani A, Bhatt P, Savani GT, Patel J, Mavani K, Bhimani R, Tripathi B, Mohamad T, Remetz MS, Curtis JP, Attaran RR, Grines C, Mena CI, Cleman M, Forrest JK, Badheka AO. Comparison of Inhospital Outcomes and Hospitalization Costs of Peripheral Angioplasty and Endovascular Stenting. The American Journal Of Cardiology 2015, 116: 634-641. PMID: 26096999, DOI: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2015.05.031.Peer-Reviewed Original ResearchConceptsLower amputation ratesInhospital mortalityPostprocedural complicationsHospitalization costsEndovascular stentingAmputation rateUtilization Project Nationwide Inpatient Sample databaseTwo-level hierarchical multivariateNationwide Inpatient Sample databaseComposite end pointPeripheral arterial diseaseHigher hospitalization costsAppropriate International ClassificationPeripheral endovascular interventionsInhospital outcomesSecondary outcomesPeripheral angioplastyPrimary outcomeArterial diseaseClinical outcomesStudy cohortNinth RevisionPatency ratesEndovascular interventionAngioplastyCardiac Resynchronization Therapy in Women Versus Men
Zusterzeel R, Spatz ES, Curtis JP, Sanders WE, Selzman KA, Piña IL, Bao H, Ponirakis A, Varosy PD, Masoudi FA, Caños DA, Strauss DG. Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy in Women Versus Men. Circulation Cardiovascular Quality And Outcomes 2015, 8: s4-s11. PMID: 25714821, DOI: 10.1161/circoutcomes.114.001548.Peer-Reviewed Original ResearchMeSH KeywordsAgedAged, 80 and overBundle-Branch BlockCardiac Resynchronization TherapyCardiac Resynchronization Therapy DevicesDefibrillators, ImplantableElectric CountershockFemaleHealth Status DisparitiesHeart Conduction SystemHeart FailureHumansKaplan-Meier EstimateMalePropensity ScoreProportional Hazards ModelsRegistriesRisk FactorsSex FactorsStroke VolumeTreatment OutcomeUnited StatesVentricular Function, LeftConceptsLeft bundle branch blockQRS durationImplantable cardioverter defibrillatorPatient sexDeath riskCardioverter defibrillatorBetter survivalMortality differencesNew York Heart Association class IIILeft ventricular ejection fractionWomen Versus MenCardiac resynchronization therapyVentricular ejection fractionRelative death riskBenefit of CRTLonger QRS durationShorter QRS durationBundle branch blockLower mortality riskEjection fractionHeart failureResynchronization therapyCardiac resynchronizationBranch blockMortality risk
2014
Primary Prevention Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillators and Survival in Older Women
Zeitler EP, Hellkamp AS, Fonarow GC, Hammill SC, Curtis LH, Hernandez AF, Al-Khalidi HR, Curtis JP, Heidenreich PA, Anstrom KJ, Peterson ED, Mark DB, Hammill BG, Sanders GD, Al-Khatib SM. Primary Prevention Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillators and Survival in Older Women. JACC Heart Failure 2014, 3: 159-167. PMID: 25543969, PMCID: PMC4461749, DOI: 10.1016/j.jchf.2014.09.006.Peer-Reviewed Original ResearchConceptsPrimary prevention implantable cardioverter defibrillatorsImplantable cardioverter defibrillatorHeart failureCardioverter defibrillatorOlder womenNational Cardiovascular Data Registry ICD RegistryLeft ventricular dysfunctionSignificant survival benefitSurvival of womenYears of ageMedicare claims databaseEligible patientsCause mortalityPrimary endpointVentricular dysfunctionSurvival benefitICD RegistryClaims databaseHeart failure databaseLonger survivalClinical trialsPropensity score methodsPatientsWomenSurvivalComparative effectiveness of cardiac resynchronization therapy with an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator versus defibrillator therapy alone: a cohort study.
Masoudi FA, Mi X, Curtis LH, Peterson PN, Curtis JP, Fonarow GC, Hammill SC, Heidenreich PA, Al-Khatib SM, Piccini JP, Qualls LG, Hernandez AF. Comparative effectiveness of cardiac resynchronization therapy with an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator versus defibrillator therapy alone: a cohort study. Annals Of Internal Medicine 2014, 160: 603-11. PMID: 24798523, DOI: 10.7326/m13-1879.Peer-Reviewed Original ResearchMeSH KeywordsAgedAged, 80 and overCardiac Resynchronization TherapyComparative Effectiveness ResearchDefibrillators, ImplantableElectrocardiographyHeart FailureHumansInfectionsPatient ReadmissionPropensity ScoreRetrospective StudiesRisk FactorsStroke VolumeTreatment OutcomeVentricular Dysfunction, LeftConceptsReduced left ventricular ejection fractionLeft ventricular ejection fractionHeart failure readmissionVentricular ejection fractionCardiac resynchronization therapyICD therapyQRS durationLower riskCohort studyICD RegistryResynchronization therapyEjection fractionNational Cardiovascular Data Registry ICD RegistryImplantable cardioverter-defibrillator therapyLeft bundle branch blockPropensity-matched patientsRetrospective cohort studyCardioverter-defibrillator therapyDevice-related complicationsBundle branch blockDevice-related infectionsCardiovascular readmissionCause readmissionDefibrillator therapyICD implantation
2013
Comparison of Intermediate-Term Outcomes of Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting Versus Drug-Eluting Stents for Patients ≥75 Years of Age
Hannan EL, Zhong Y, Berger PB, Walford G, Curtis JP, Wu C, Venditti FJ, Higgins RS, Smith CR, Lahey SJ, King SB. Comparison of Intermediate-Term Outcomes of Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting Versus Drug-Eluting Stents for Patients ≥75 Years of Age. The American Journal Of Cardiology 2013, 113: 803-808. PMID: 24440331, DOI: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2013.11.035.Peer-Reviewed Original ResearchMeSH KeywordsAgedAged, 80 and overComorbidityComparative Effectiveness ResearchCoronary Artery BypassCoronary Artery DiseaseCoronary StenosisCreatinineDiabetic AngiopathiesDrug-Eluting StentsFemaleHumansKaplan-Meier EstimateMalePercutaneous Coronary InterventionPropensity ScorePulmonary Disease, Chronic ObstructiveRegistriesRetreatmentRisk FactorsTreatment OutcomeConceptsPercutaneous coronary interventionDrug-eluting stentsMortality rateRevascularization ratesMultiple patient risk factorsRepeat revascularization rateCoronary artery bypassMultivessel coronary diseaseIntermediate-term outcomesPatient risk factorsYears of ageArtery bypassCoronary interventionOlder patientsCoronary diseaseRisk factorsObservational studySimilar mortalityPatientsCABGOutcomesStentsYearsBypassMortalitySurvival of Patients Receiving a Primary Prevention Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator in Clinical Practice vs Clinical Trials
Al-Khatib SM, Hellkamp A, Bardy GH, Hammill S, Hall WJ, Mark DB, Anstrom KJ, Curtis J, Al-Khalidi H, Curtis LH, Heidenreich P, Peterson ED, Sanders G, Clapp-Channing N, Lee KL, Moss AJ. Survival of Patients Receiving a Primary Prevention Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator in Clinical Practice vs Clinical Trials. JAMA 2013, 309: 55-62. PMID: 23280225, PMCID: PMC3638257, DOI: 10.1001/jama.2012.157182.Peer-Reviewed Original ResearchConceptsPrimary prevention ICDsPrimary prevention clinical trialsTrial-eligible patientsSurvival of patientsPrevention clinical trialsClinical trialsICD RegistrySCD-HeFTClinical practiceRegistry patientsMADIT-IISimilar patientsNational Cardiovascular Data Registry ICD RegistryPrimary prevention implantable cardioverter defibrillatorsSurvival rateImplantable cardioverter-defibrillator therapyMADIT II criteriaMADIT II patientsSCD-HeFT criteriaCardioverter-defibrillator therapyClinical trial patientsLarge national registryRandomized clinical trialsProportional hazards modelImplantable cardioverter defibrillator