Comparative Analysis of Patient Characteristics in Cardiogenic Shock Studies: Differences Between Trials and Registries

OBJECTIVES: This study sought to evaluate the differences in cardiogenic shock patient characteristics in trial patients and real-life patients. BACKGROUND: Cardiogenic shock (CS) is a leading cause of mortality in patients presenting with acute myocardial infarction (AMI). However, the enrollment of patients into clinical trials is challenging and may not be representative of real-world patients. METHODS: We performed a systematic review of studies in patients presenting with AMI-related CS and compared patient characteristics of those enrolled into randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with those in registries. RESULTS: We included 14 RCTs (n = 2,154) and 12 registries (n = 133,617). RCTs included more men (73% vs 67.7%, P \u3c 0.001) compared with registries. Patients enrolled in RCTs had fewer comorbidities, including less hypertension (61.6% vs 65.9%, P \u3c 0.001), dyslipidemia (36.4% vs 53.6%, P \u3c 0.001), a history of stroke or transient ischemic attack (7.1% vs 10.7%, P \u3c 0.001), and prior coronary artery bypass graft surgery (5.4% vs 7.5%, P \u3c 0.001). Patients enrolled in RCTs also had lower lactate levels (4.7 ± 2.3 mmol/L vs 5.9 ± 1.9 mmol/L, P \u3c 0.001) and higher mean arterial pressure (73.0 ± 8.8 mm Hg vs 62.5 ± 12.2 mm Hg, P \u3c 0.001). Percutaneous coronary intervention (97.5% vs 58.4%, P \u3c 0.001) and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (11.6% vs 3.4%, P \u3c 0.001) were used more often in RCTs. The in-hospital mortality (23.9% vs 38.4%, P \u3c 0.001) and 30-day mortality (39.9% vs 45.9%, P \u3c 0.001) were lower in RCT patients. CONCLUSIONS: RCTs in AMI-related CS tend to enroll fewer women and lower-risk patients compared with registries. Patients enrolled in RCTs are more likely to receive aggressive treatment with percutaneous coronary intervention and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation and have lower in-hospital and 30-day mortality

Percutaneous Mitral Valve Repair versus Optimal Medical Therapy in Patients with Functional Mitral Regurgitation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Objectives. To compare percutaneous mitral valve repair (PMVR) with optimal medical therapy (OMT) in patients with heart failure (HF) and severe functional mitral regurgitation (FMR). Background. Many patients with HF and FMR are not suitable for surgical valve replacement and remain symptomatic despite maximal OMT. PMVR has recently emerged as an alternative solution. Methods. We performed a systematic review and a meta-analysis to address this question. Cochrane CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and Scopus were searched for randomized (RCT) and nonrandomized studies comparing PMVR with OMT in patients with HF and FMR. Primary endpoint was all-cause midterm mortality (at 1 and 2 years). Secondary endpoints were 30-day mortality and cardiovascular mortality and HF hospitalizations, at maximum follow-up. Studies including mixed cohort of degenerative and functional MR were allowed initially but were excluded in a secondary sensitivity analysis for each of the study’s end points. This meta-analysis was performed following the publication of two RCTs (MITRA-FR and COAPT). Results. Eight studies (six observational, two RCTs) comprising 3,009 patients were included in the meta-analysis. In comparison with OMT, PMVR significantly reduced 1-year mortality (RR: 0.70 [0.56, 0.87]; p=0.002; I2=47.6%), 2-year mortality (RR: 0.63 [0.55, 0.73]; p\u3c0.001; I2=0%), and cardiovascular mortality (RR: 0.32 [0.23, 0.44]; p\u3c0.001; I2=0%). No significant difference between PMVR+OMT and OMT was noted in HF hospitalization (HR: 0.69 [0.40, 1.20]; p=0.19; I2=85%) and 30-day mortality (RR: 1.13 [0.68, 1.87]; p=0.16; I2=0%). Conclusions. In comparison with OMT, PMVR significantly reduces 1-year mortality, 2-year mortality, and cardiovascular mortality in patients with HF and severe MR

2015 SCAI/ACC/HFSA/STS Clinical Expert Consensus Statement on the Use of Percutaneous Mechanical Circulatory Support Devices in Cardiovascular Care: Endorsed by the American Heart Assocation, the Cardiological Society of India, and Sociedad Latino Americana de Cardiologia Intervencion; Affirmation of Value by the Canadian Association of Interventional Cardiology-Association Canadienne de Cardiologie d\u27intervention.

Although historically the intra-aortic balloon pump has been the only mechanical circulatory support device available to clinicians, a number of new devices have become commercially available and have entered clinical practice. These include axial flow pumps, such as Impella(®); left atrial to femoral artery bypass pumps, specifically the TandemHeart; and new devices for institution of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. These devices differ significantly in their hemodynamic effects, insertion, monitoring, and clinical applicability. This document reviews the physiologic impact on the circulation of these devices and their use in specific clinical situations. These situations include patients undergoing high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention, those presenting with cardiogenic shock, and acute decompensated heart failure. Specialized uses for right-sided support and in pediatric populations are discussed and the clinical utility of mechanical circulatory support devices is reviewed, as are the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association clinical practice guidelines

2015 SCAI/ACC/HFSA/STS Clinical Expert Consensus Statement on the Use of Percutaneous Mechanical Circulatory Support Devices in Cardiovascular Care: Endorsed by the American Heart Assocation, the Cardiological Society of India, and Sociedad Latino Americana de Cardiologia Intervencion; Affirmation of Value by the Canadian Association of Interventional Cardiology-Association Canadienne de Cardiologie d\u27intervention.

Although historically the intra-aortic balloon pump has been the only mechanical circulatory support device available to clinicians, a number of new devices have become commercially available and have entered clinical practice. These include axial flow pumps, such as Impella(®); left atrial to femoral artery bypass pumps, specifically the TandemHeart; and new devices for institution of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. These devices differ significantly in their hemodynamic effects, insertion, monitoring, and clinical applicability. This document reviews the physiologic impact on the circulation of these devices and their use in specific clinical situations. These situations include patients undergoing high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention, those presenting with cardiogenic shock, and acute decompensated heart failure. Specialized uses for right-sided support and in pediatric populations are discussed and the clinical utility of mechanical circulatory support devices is reviewed, as are the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association clinical practice guidelines

Effects of biofertilizer containing N-fixer, P and K solubilizers and AM fungi on maize growth: A greenhouse trial.

An in vitro study was undertaken to evaluate the compatibility of indigenous plant growth promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR) with commonly used inorganic and organic sources of fertilizers in tea plantations. The nitrogenous, phosphatic and potash fertilizers used for this study were urea, rock phosphate and muriate of potash, respectively. The organic sources of fertilizers neem cake, composted coir pith and vermicompost were also used. PGPRs such as nitrogen fixer; Azospirillum lipoferum, Phosphate Solubilizing Bacteria (PSB); Pseudomonas putida, Potassium Solubilizing Bacteria (KSB); Burkholderia cepacia and Pseudomonas putida were used for compatibility study. Results were indicated that PGPRs preferred the coir pith and they proved their higher colony establishment in the formulation except Azospirillum spp. that preferred vermicompost for their establishment. The optimum dose of neem cake powder