No abstract

IntroductionHeart failure is associated with recurrent hospitalizations and high mortality. Guideline directed medical treatment (GDMT), including beta blockers (BBs), angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (ACE-Is), angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) and aldosterone antagonists (AAs) has shown to improve outcomes. Current guidelines recommend the use of these medication classes at maximally tolerated dosages. Despite the evidence, < 25% of patients with heart failure with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (HFrEF) are on the appropriate medical regimen titrated to the target doses. As such, we sought to assess the utility of a focused GDMT clinic to reduce this gap.MethodsWe conducted a retrospective chart review through existing patient data in a single center teaching hospital of patients referred to a focused GDMT clinic primarily staffed with heart failure trained nurse specialists, physician assistants and cardiologists. Management guidelines were developed with protocols for the initiation and uptitration of all therapeutic agents considered as GDMT.Our primary objective was to determine whether enrollment into a dedicated nursing led guideline directed medical therapy clinic would increase the proportion of patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction on appropriate medications as well as medication dosages in patients, the percentage of patients on the following medications and percentage at target doses: Renin-Angiotensin-Aldosterone System Blockers, Evidence Based Beta Blockers, and Aldosterone Antagonists. Our secondary objective was to determine if there was any clinical benefit on objective measures including renal function, hospital admissions, mortality and implantable defibrillator shocks.ResultsBetween October 2015 and March 2017, 63 patients were identified by requisition forms, in which 61 were able to be identified based on legibility of identifying information. Mean duration of follow up was 264.44 ± 162.68 days over 7 ± 3.94 days. Mean ejection fraction was 21.8 ± 7.3%. New onset cardiomyopathies (diagnosed within 30 days) compiled 21% of the patient population while those with demonstrated cardiomyopathies (> 90 days) compiled 48% of the patient population. Patients with NYHA class III heart failure compiled 65% of the patient population.There was a statistically significant increase in the mean number of GDMT at any dose (2.31 ± 0.76 to 2.74 ± 0.66; p < 0.001) and mean number of GDMT at target doses (0.54 ± 0.79 to 1.52 ± 1.1; p < 0.001). Percentage of the population that were on no target doses at initial visit was 62% which was reduced to 18% after intervention.Clinical improvement was reflected in significant improvement in ejection fraction from 21.8 ± 7.8% to 36.2 ± 14.3% (p < 0.001). Increases in sodium and chloride were statistically small but significant. There a significant reduction in heart failure hospitalizations in comparison to a year prior to after the initial encounter in the clinic (p < 0.001).ConclusionThis pilot study showed that a nurse direc...

Objective To summarize the association between vegetarian versus non-vegetarian diet on mortality due to ischemic heart disease, cerebrovascular disease, or all-cause mortality. Methods We searched PubMed, Cochrane databases, and ClinicalTrials.Gov from the inception of the databases to October 2019 with no language restriction. Randomized controlled trials or prospective observational studies comparing the association between vegetarian versus non-vegetarian diets among adults and reporting major adverse cardiovascular outcomes were selected. We used Paule-Mandel estimator for tau2 with Hartung–Knapp adjustment for random effects model to estimate risk ratio [RR] with 95% confidence interval [CI].The primary outcome of interest was all-cause mortality. The secondary outcome was ischemic heart disease mortality. Results Eight observational studies ( n = 131,869) were included in the analysis. Over a weighted mean follow-up of 10.68 years, very low certainty of evidence concluded that a vegetarian diet compared with a non-vegetarian diet was associated with similar risk of all-cause (RR: 0.84, 95% CI: 0.65–1.07, I 2 : 97%) or cerebrovascular mortality (RR: 0.84, 95% CI: 0.63–1.14, I 2 : 90%), but was associated with a reduced risk of ischemic heart disease mortality (RR: 0.70, 95% CI: 0.55–0.89, I 2 : 82%). Conclusion A vegetarian diet, compared with a non-vegetarian diet, was associated with a reduced risk of ischemic heart disease mortality, whereas it had no effect on all-cause and cerebrovascular mortality. However, the results are to be considered with caution considering the low certainty of evidence. Despite recent studies supporting no restriction on animal protein intake gaining wide media attention and public traction, consideration for vegetarianism amongst those with risk factors for coronary artery disease should be contemplated.

Background Cancer-associated pulmonary embolism (PE) places a significant burden on patients and health care systems. Methods A retrospective cross-sectional analysis of the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) database was performed in patients with acute PE from 2002 to 2014. Among patients hospitalized with PE, we investigated the differences in clinical outcomes and healthcare utilization in patients with and without cancer. A multivariate logistic regression model was applied to calculate adjusted odds ratios (OR) to estimate the impact of cancer on clinical outcomes. Wilcoxon rank sum tests were used to determine the differences in healthcare utilization between the two cohorts. Results Among 3,313,044 patients who were discharged with a diagnosis of acute PE, 84.2% did not have cancer, while 15.8% had cancer as a comorbidity (56% metastatic cancer, 35% solid tumor without metastasis, and 9% lymphoma). Patients with cancer had a higher mean age but lower rates of common comorbidities except for coagulation deficiency than patients without a cancer diagnosis. In patients with cancer, the rate of IVC filter placement was higher (21.7% vs. 13.11%, OR 1.76 (95% CI 1.73–1.79); p < 0.0001) and thrombolytic use lower (1.34% vs. 2.15%, OR 0.68 (95% CI 0.64–0.72); p < 0.0001). Patients with cancer hospitalized for PE had a higher all-cause in-hospital mortality (11.8% vs. 6.6%, OR 1.79 (95% CI 1.75–1.83); p < 0.0001), longer length of stay (6 vs. 5 days; p < 0.0001), higher total charge per hospitalization ($30,885 vs. $27,273; p < 0.0001), and higher rates of home health services upon discharge (35.8% vs. 23.2%; p < 0.0001) compared with those without cancer. Conclusion Concurrent cancer diagnosis in patients hospitalized for acute PE was associated with a 90% increase in all-cause mortality, longer length of stay, higher total charge per hospitalization, and higher rates of home health services upon discharge. The majority (56%) of patients with cancer had metastatic disease. Furthermore, there were identifiable differences in the intervention for acute PE between the two groups.