Cardionerds: A Cardiology Podcast

The following question refers to Section 6.1 of the 2022 AHA/ACC/HFSA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure. The question is asked by Keck School of Medicine USC medical student & CardioNerds Intern Hirsh Elhence, answered first by Mount Sinai Hospital cardiology fellow and CardioNerds FIT Trialist Dr. Jason Feinman, and then by expert faculty Dr. Mark Drazner. Dr. Drazner is an advanced heart failure and transplant cardiologist, Professor of Medicine, and Clinical Chief of Cardiology at UT Southwestern. He is the President of the Heart Failure Society of America. The Decipher the Guidelines: 2022 AHA / ACC / HFSA Guideline for The Management of Heart Failure series was developed by the CardioNerds and created in collaboration with the American Heart Association and the Heart Failure Society of America. It was created by 30 trainees spanning college through advanced fellowship under the leadership of CardioNerds Cofounders Dr. Amit Goyal and Dr. Dan Ambinder, with mentorship from Dr. Anu Lala, Dr. Robert Mentz, and Dr. Nancy Sweitzer. We thank Dr. Judy Bezanson and Dr. Elliott Antman for tremendous guidance. Enjoy this Circulation 2022 Paths to Discovery article to learn about the CardioNerds story, mission, and values. Question #2 A 67-year-old man with a past medical history of type 2 diabetes mellitus, hypertension, and active tobacco smoking presents to the emergency room with substernal chest pain for the past 5 hours. An electrocardiogram reveals ST segment elevations in the anterior precordial leads and he is transferred emergently to the catheterization laboratory. Coronary angiography reveals 100% occlusion of the proximal left anterior descending artery, and he is successfully treated with a drug eluting stent resulting in TIMI 3 coronary flow. Following his procedure, a transthoracic echocardiogram is performed which reveals a left ventricular ejection fraction of 35% with a hypokinetic anterior wall. Which of the following medications would be the best choice to prevent the incidence of heart failure and reduce mortality? A Lisinopril B Diltiazem C Carvedilol D Sacubitril-valsartan E Both A and C Answer #2 The correct answer is E – both lisinopril and carvedilol are appropriate to reduce the incidence of heart failure and mortality. Evidence-based beta-blockers and ACE inhibitors both have Class 1 recommendations in patients with a recent myocardial infarction and left ventricular ejection fraction ≤ 40% to reduce the incidence of heart failure and to reduce mortality. Multiple randomized controlled trials have investigated both medications in the post myocardial infarction setting and demonstrated improved ventricular remodeling as well as benefits for mortality and development of incident heart failure. At this time, there is not sufficient evidence to recommend ARNi over ACEi for patients with reduced LVEF following acute MI. The PARADISE-MI trial randomized a total of 5,661 patients with myocardial infarction complicated by a reduced LVEF, pulmonary congestion, or both to receive either sacubitril-valsartan (97-103mg twice daily) or ramipril (5mg twice daily). After a median follow up time of 22 months, there was no statistically significant difference in the primary outcome of cardiovascular death or incident heart failure. At this time, ARNi have not been included in the guidelines for this specific population. Diltiazem is a non-dihydropyridine calcium channel blocker, a family of drugs with negative inotropic effects and which may be harmful in patients with depressed LVEF (Class 3: Harm, LOE C-LD). Main Takeaway:  For patients with recent myocardial infarction and reduced left ventricular function both beta blockers and ACEi have Class 1 recommendations to reduce the incidence of heart failure and decrease mortality. Guideline Location: Section 6.1 Decipher the Guidelines: 2022 Heart Failure Guidelines PageCardioNerds Episode PageCardioNerds AcademyCardionerds Healy Honor Roll CardioNerds Journal ClubSubscribe to The Heartbeat Newsletter!Check out CardioNerds SWAG!Become a CardioNerds Patron!

The following question refers to Section 2.1 of the 2022 AHA/ACC/HFSA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure. The question is asked by Keck School of Medicine USC medical student & CardioNerds Intern Hirsh Elhence, answered first by Mount Sinai Hospital cardiology fellow and CardioNerds FIT Trialist Dr. Jason Feinman, and then by expert faculty Dr. Biykem Bozkurt. Dr. Bozkurt is the Mary and Gordon Cain Chair, Professor of Medicine, Director of the Winters Center for Heart Failure Research, and an advanced heart failure and transplant cardiologist at Baylor College of Medicine in Houston, TX. She is former President of HFSA, former senior associate editor for Circulation, current Editor-In-Chief of JACC Heart Failure. Dr. Bozkurt was the Vice Chair of the writing committee for the 2022 Heart Failure Guidelines. The Decipher the Guidelines: 2022 AHA / ACC / HFSA Guideline for The Management of Heart Failure series was developed by the CardioNerds and created in collaboration with the American Heart Association and the Heart Failure Society of America. It was created by 30 trainees spanning college through advanced fellowship under the leadership of CardioNerds Cofounders Dr. Amit Goyal and Dr. Dan Ambinder, with mentorship from Dr. Anu Lala, Dr. Robert Mentz, and Dr. Nancy Sweitzer. We thank Dr. Judy Bezanson and Dr. Elliott Antman for tremendous guidance. Enjoy this Circulation 2022 Paths to Discovery article to learn about the CardioNerds story, mission, and values. Question #1 A 23-year-old man presents to his primary care physician for an annual visit. His father was diagnosed with idiopathic cardiomyopathy at 40 years of age. His blood pressure in clinic is 146/90 mmHg. He is a personal trainer and exercises daily, including both weightlifting and cardio. He denies any anabolic steroid use. He is an active tobacco smoker, approximately ½ pack per day. Review of systems is negative for symptoms. What stage of heart failure most appropriately describes his current status? A Stage A B Stage B C Stage C D Stage D E None of the above Answer #1 The correct answer is A – Stage A of heart failure. Overall, the ACC/AHA stages of HF were designed to emphasize the development and progression of disease. More advanced stages and progression are associated with reduced survival. Stage A HF is where patients are “at risk for HF”, but without current or previous symptoms or signs of HF, and without structural/functional heart disease or abnormal biomarkers. At-risk patients include those with hypertension, cardiovascular disease, diabetes, obesity, exposure to cardiotoxic agents, genetic variant for cardiomyopathy, or family history of cardiomyopathy. Stage B HF is the “pre-heart failure” stage where patients are without current or previous symptoms or signs of HF but do have at least one of the following: Structural heart disease (i.e., reduced left or right ventricular systolic function, ventricular hypertrophy, chamber enlargement, wall motion abnormalities, and valvular heart disease) Evidence of increased filling pressures Risk factors and increased natriuretic peptide levels or persistently elevated cardiac troponin in the absence of an alternate diagnosis Stage C HF indicates symptomatic heart failure where patients have current or previous symptoms or signs of HF. Stage D HF indicates advanced heart failure with marked HF symptoms that interfere with daily life and with recurrent hospitalizations despite attempts to optimize guideline-directed medical therapy. Therapeutic interventions in each stage aim to modify risk factors (Stage A), treat risk and structural heart disease to prevent HF (stage B), and reduce symptoms, morbidity, and mortality (stages C and D). Given this patient’s family and social histories, along with the clinical finding of elevated blood pressure, he is best classified as having Stage A, or at risk for HF. Were he to have signs of cardiac abnormalities on chest X-ray, ECG, biomarkers, or other testing, he would then be classified as having Stage B, or pre-heart failure. Main Takeaway: It is important to identify patients who are at risk for heart failure (Stage A HF) early to modify risk factors and prevent disease progression. Guideline location: Section 2.1, Figure 1, Table 3 Decipher the Guidelines: 2022 Heart Failure Guidelines PageCardioNerds Episode PageCardioNerds AcademyCardionerds Healy Honor Roll CardioNerds Journal ClubSubscribe to The Heartbeat Newsletter!Check out CardioNerds SWAG!Become a CardioNerds Patron!

Join CardioNerds (Dr. Mark Belkin and Dr. Natalie Tapaskar) as they discuss the 2022 AHA/ACC/HFSA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure with Writing Committee Chair Dr. Paul Heidenreich. They discuss how one gets involved with a guideline writing committee, the nuts and bolts of the guideline writing process, pitfalls and utility of the term “GDMT,” background behind inclusion of “Value Statements,” potential omissions from the document, clinical uptake of recommendations, and anticipated changes for the next iteration. Audio editing by CardioNerds academy intern, Pace Wetstein. This discussion is a prelude to the CardioNerds Decipher The Guidelines Series designed to enhance understanding and uptake of the 2022 AHA/ACC/HFSA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure. We will be using high-impact, board-style, clinical vignette-based questions to highlight core concepts relevant to your practice. We will do so by releasing several short bite-sized Pods with one question per episode. Note that the cases used are hypothetical and created solely to illustrate core concepts. This series was developed by the CardioNerds and created in collaboration with the American Heart Association and the Heart Failure Society of America. It was created by 30 trainees spanning college through advanced fellowship under the leadership of CardioNerds Cofounders Dr. Amit Goyal and Dr. Dan Ambinder, with mentorship from Dr. Anu Lala, Dr. Robert Mentz, and Dr. Nancy Sweitzer. We thank Dr. Judy Bezanson and Dr. Elliott Antman for tremendous guidance. Enjoy this Circulation 2022 Paths to Discovery article to learn about the CardioNerds story, mission, and values. Decipher the Guidelines: 2022 Heart Failure Guidelines PageCardioNerds Episode PageCardioNerds AcademyCardionerds Healy Honor Roll CardioNerds Journal ClubSubscribe to The Heartbeat Newsletter!Check out CardioNerds SWAG!Become a CardioNerds Patron!

The importance of recognition and diagnosis of cardiac amyloidosis is at an all-time high due to its high prevalence and improved therapeutic strategies. Here we discuss what CardioNerds need to know about the manifestations, diagnosis, and management of transthyretin (ATTR) and light chain (AL) cardiac amyloidosis. Join Dr. Dan Ambinder (CardioNerds Cofounder), Dr. Dinu-Valentin Balanescu (Series Cochair, Chief Resident at Beaumont Health, and soon FIT at Mayo Clinic), and Dr. Dan Davies (Episode FIT Lead and FIT at Mayo Clinic) as they discuss cardiac amyloidosis with Dr. Omar Siddiqi, cardiologist at the Boston University Amyloidosis Center and program director for the general cardiovascular fellowship program at Boston University, a CardioNerds Healy Honor Roll Program. Episode notes were drafted by Dr. Dan Davies. Audio editing by CardioNerds Academy Intern, student doctor Chelsea Amo Tweneboah. Access the CardioNerds Cardiac Amyloidosis Series for a deep dive into this important topic. This episode is supported by a grant from Pfizer Inc. This CardioNerds Cardio-Oncology series is a multi-institutional collaboration made possible by contributions of stellar fellow leads and expert faculty from several programs, led by series co-chairs, Dr. Giselle Suero Abreu, Dr. Dinu Balanescu, and Dr. Teodora Donisan.  Enjoy this Circulation 2022 Paths to Discovery article to learn about the CardioNerds story, mission, and values. Pearls • Notes • References • Production Team CardioNerds Cardio-Oncology PageCardioNerds Episode PageCardioNerds AcademyCardionerds Healy Honor Roll CardioNerds Journal ClubSubscribe to The Heartbeat Newsletter!Check out CardioNerds SWAG!Become a CardioNerds Patron! Pearls and Quotes Cardiac amyloidosis is no longer considered a rare disease, especially transthyretin amyloidosis in older male patients with HFpEF and aortic stenosis. Echocardiogram is the “gate keeper” of cardiac imaging and provides initial evidence of amyloid infiltration, while cardiac MRI can help refine the presence of an infiltrative cardiomyopathy versus other causes of increased wall thickness. The most clinically important types of amyloid heart disease are transthyretin (ATTR) and light chain (AL) amyloidosis. The workup to differentiate these disorders includes a gammopathy panel to screen for the presence of potentially amyloidogenic light chains (serum and urine electrophoresis WITH immunofixation and serum free light chains), and cardiac scintigraphy with Technetium-99m-labeled bone-seeking tracers (PYP, DPD, etc.) to identify cardiac aTTR infiltration if the gammopathy panel is unrevealing. There is still a role for endomyocardial biopsy in the diagnosis of cardiac amyloidosis! All patients in whom there is concern for cardiac amyloidosis and gammopathy panel indicates the presence of monoclonal light chains should have a biopsy to obtain a tissue diagnosis of likely AL amyloidosis. Alternatively, an endocardial biopsy may prove valuable in patients who have confusing phenotypic features between amyloid types, such as a patient with abnormal monoclonal protein and positive PYP imaging. Be suspicious of heart failure patients that do not tolerate typical medications that lower heart rate. In the restrictive cardiomyopathy of cardiac amyloidosis, patients are reliant on higher heart rates to compensate for the inability to augment stroke volume. Be suspicious of amyloidosis in patients with recurrent left atrial thrombi despite anticoagulation. Show notes CardioNerds Cardiac Amyloid, updated 1.20.21 1. What is cardiac amyloidosis and how common is it? Cardiac amyloidosis is adisorder caused by misfolding of proteins into insoluble forms which are deposited into extracellular spaces of the heart, commonly causing a stiff and thick heart with progressive diastolic dysfunction with restrictive hemodynamics and ensuing heart failure. The two most common types of amyloid protein that affect the heart are transthyretin (ATTR) and light chain (AL). Transthyretin amyloidosis is caused by a misfolded transporter protein produced by the liver, while light chain amyloidosis is caused by a misfolded light chain immunoglobulin produced by clonal plasma cells. ATTR cardiac amyloidosis may be present in 6-17% of older patients with HFpEF and increased wall thickness, as well as in 4-16% of patients undergoing intervention for severe aortic stenosis. AL amyloidosis is much rarer, with a prevalence of about 12 cases per million persons per year. 2. What are some non-cardiac clues to the presence of cardiac amyloidosis? Non-cardiac clinical clues for transthyretin amyloidosis (ATTR) include spinal stenosis, biceps tendon rupture, carpal tunnel syndrome (particularly when bilateral), and peripheral neuropathy. Bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome may be present in up to 60% of ATTR-CA patients with over 40% having a history of biceps tendon rupture. Non-cardiac clinical clues for light chain amyloidosis (AL) include renal disease (esp. nephrotic syndrome), macroglossia, autonomic and peripheral neuropathy, and periorbital purpura (racoon eyes). 3. What are common multimodality imaging features used for the diagnosis of cardiac amyloidosis? For an in-depth discussion about the use of multimodality imaging in the diagnosis of cardiac amyloidosis, enjoy CardioNerds Episode #109 – Nuclear & Multimodality Imaging: Cardiac Amyloidosis. Echocardiography (echo) is among the first test performed in patients for the diagnosis of cardiovascular symptoms and may provide initial clues to the diagnosis. Features of cardiac amyloidosis on echocardiogram include increased left ventricular wall thickness (>12 mm, classically concentric) with abnormal diastolic function, increased right ventricular free wall and interatrial septal thickness, as well as increased valve thickness. There may be a small pericardial effusion. Left ventricular strain is usually abnormal with a characteristic apical sparing pattern. A granular, or sparkling, appearance of the myocardium has been classically described but is poorly predictive. Cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging is often used for differentiation of increased left ventricular wall thickness (infiltrative cardiomyopathies, hypertrophic cardiomyopathies, etc.) and in patients at increased risk of AL cardiac amyloidosis. Common features specific to CMR include abnormal myocardial nulling (blood pool nulls before the myocardium on inversion recovery sequences), elevated native T1 value, increased extracellular volume (ECV), and late gadolinium enhancement (classically in a diffuse, non-ischemic pattern). Bone scintigraphy (technetium pyrophosphate [PYP] or DPD) is a nuclear imaging study used for the diagnosis of transthyretin amyloidosis. In the absence of an abnormal monoclonal protein, the sensitivity and specificity approach 100%, allowing for the “non-biopsy” diagnosis of ATTR-CA (specifically in the context of a negative gammopathy panel). The 2019 multi-society diagnostic guidelines recommend SPECT imaging be used in combination planar imaging for all cases to improve predictive characteristics. 4. How are heart failure and arrhythmias managed in patients with cardiac amyloidosis? The mainstay of heart failure therapy in cardiac amyloidosis is loop diuretics with or without aldosterone antagonists. Spironolactone was shown to be effective in patients with a phenotype suggesting cardiac amyloidosis in a subgroup analysis of TOPCAT. Patients often have poor tolerance of guideline directed medical therapies for heart failure, including beta blockers and calcium channel blockers, with ACEI/ARB/ARNI frequently limited by hypotension. The SGLT2 inhibitors appear to be tolerated in patients with cardiac amyloidosis but more research is needed to determine impact on cardiovascular outcomes. Rate and rhythm control strategies for atrial arrhythmias can both be successful, but patients may be intolerant of medications. The risk of cardioembolic events in amyloid patients with atrial fibrillations is elevated, independent of CHA2DS2 -VASc score, and therefore all patients should be offered anticoagulation. Be suspicious of amyloidosis in patients with recurrent left atrial appendage thrombi despite anticoagulation. 5. What specific therapies can be used for transthyretin (ATTR) amyloidosis and light chain (AL) amyloidosis? Tafamidis is a transthyretin stabilizer that inhibits tetramer dissociation and reduces amyloid deposition in extracellular tissue. It is the only FDA approved medication for transthyretin cardiac amyloidosis and was shown to be associated with reduced mortality and heart failure hospitalization compared to control in the ATTR-ACT trial. Patisiran is a small interfering RNA that works as a gene silencer for ATTR protein production and is FDA approved for patients with polyneuropathy secondary to hereditary ATTR. Analysis of cardiac outcomes in the APOLLO trial suggest early stabilization of left ventricular wall thickness and reduction in natriuretic peptides in patients with features of concomitant cardiac involvement. Specific therapies for AL amyloidosis are managed by hematologists with the goal of complete hematologic response to prevent further immunoglobulin production and amyloid deposition. These therapies typically include chemotherapy regimens (e.g. cyclophosphamide, bortezomib, dexamethasone [CyBorD]), daratumumab (an anti-CD38 antibody), with or without autologous stem cell transplantation. There are many ongoing trials with novel therapies, with specific interest in treatments targeting removal of systemically deposited amyloid fibrils. References Dorbala, S., Ando, Y., Bokhari, S. et al. ASNC/AHA/ASE/EANM/HFSA/ISA/SCMR/SNMMI expert consensus recommendations for multimodality imaging in cardiac amyloidosis: Part 1 of 2—evidence base and standardized methods of imaging. J. Nucl. Cardiol. 26, 2065–2123 (2019). Link Dorbala, S., Ando, Y., Bokhari, S. et al. ASNC/AHA/ASE/EANM/HFSA/ISA/SCMR/SNMMI expert consensus recommendations for multimodality imaging in cardiac amyloidosis: Part 2 of 2—Diagnostic criteria and appropriate utilization. J. Nucl. Cardiol. 27, 659–673 (2020). Link Griffin JM, Rosenthal JL, Grodin JL, Maurer MS, Grogan M, Cheng RK. ATTR Amyloidosis: Current and Emerging Management Strategies: JACC: CardioOncology State-of-the-Art Review. JACC CardioOncol. 2021;3(4):488-505. Link Witteles RM, Liedtke M. AL Amyloidosis for the Cardiologist and Oncologist: Epidemiology, Diagnosis, and Management. JACC CardioOncol. 2019;1(1):117-130. Link Maurer MS, Schwartz JH, Gundapaneni B, Elliott PM, Merlini G, Waddington-Cruz M, Kristen AV, Grogan M, Witteles R, Damy T, Drachman BM, Shah SJ, Hanna M, Judge DP, Barsdorf AI, Huber P, Patterson TA, Riley S, Schumacher J, Stewart M, Sultan MB, Rapezzi C; ATTR-ACT Study Investigators. Tafamidis Treatment for Patients with Transthyretin Amyloid Cardiomyopathy. N Engl J Med. 2018 Sep 13;379(11):1007-1016. Link Gertz, M. A., & Dispenzieri, A. (2020). Systemic Amyloidosis Recognition, Prognosis, and Therapy: A Systematic Review. Jama, 324(1), 79-89. https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2767867 Cappelli, F., Zampieri, M., Fumagalli, C., Nardi, G., Del Monaco, G., Matucci Cerinic, M., Allinovi, M., Taborchi, G., Martone, R., Gabriele, M., Ungar, A., Moggi Pignone, A., Marchionni, N., Di Mario, C., Olivotto, I., & Perfetto, F. (2021). Tenosynovial complications identify TTR cardiac amyloidosis among patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy phenotype. J Intern Med, 289(6), 831-839. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33615623/ Sperry, B. W., Hanna, M., Shah, S. J., Jaber, W. A., & Spertus, J. A. (2021). Spironolactone in Patients With an Echocardiographic HFpEF Phenotype Suggestive of Cardiac Amyloidosis: Results From TOPCAT. JACC Heart Fail, 9(11), 795-802. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2213177921003206?via%3Dihub Dobner, S., Bernhard, B., Asatryan, B., Windecker, S., Stortecky, S., Pilgrim, T., Gräni, C., & Hunziker, L. (2022). SGLT2 inhibitor therapy for transthyretin amyloid cardiomyopathy: early tolerance and clinical response to dapagliflozin. ESC Heart Fail. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ehf2.14188 Meet Our Collaborators International Cardio-Oncology Society ( IC-OS). IC-OS exits to advance cardiovascular care of cancer patients and survivors by promoting collaboration among researchers, educators and clinicians around the world. Learn more at https://ic-os.org/.

This episode is focused on Palliative Care and Shared Decision-Making in the CICU. In this episode, we learn about how the principles of palliative care and shared decision-making apply to our patients across the spectrum of cardiovascular care, especially in the cardiac intensive care unit. We discuss pivotal trials of specialty palliative care and decision aids in cardiology and how they might inform our practice to enhance patient quality of life and improve goal-concordant care. Finally, we discuss practical tips and communication strategies for how to engage patients about end-of-life decisions and topics that can be utilized from outpatient to inpatient to critical care settings. “We need to help patients hope for the best and plan for the worst as time goes on.” Dr. Larry Allen Series co-chairs Dr. Eunice Dugan and Dr. Karan Desai, along with CardioNerds Co-founder Amit Goyal are joined by FIT lead, Dr. Sarah Chuzi. Dr. Chuzi is a Chicagoan and completed her internal medicine residency, cardiology fellowship, AHFTC fellowship and is now Assistant Professor at Northwestern University. Our episode expert is a true national leader in shared decision-making and palliative care in heart failure – Dr. Larry Allen, Medical Director of Advanced Heart Failure and the Co-Director of the Colorado Program for Patient-Centered Decisions at the University of Colorado School of Medicine. Audio editing by CardioNerds Academy Intern, Dr. Christian Faaborg-Andersen. The CardioNerds Cardiac Critical Care Series is a multi-institutional collaboration made possible by contributions of stellar fellow leads and expert faculty from several programs, led by series co-chairs, Dr. Mark Belkin, Dr. Eunice Dugan, Dr. Karan Desai, and Dr. Yoav Karpenshif. Enjoy this Circulation 2022 Paths to Discovery article to learn about the CardioNerds story, mission, and values. Pearls • Notes • References • Production Team CardioNerds Cardiac Critical Care PageCardioNerds Episode PageCardioNerds AcademyCardionerds Healy Honor Roll CardioNerds Journal ClubSubscribe to The Heartbeat Newsletter!Check out CardioNerds SWAG!Become a CardioNerds Patron! Pearls and Quotes – Palliative Care and Shared Decision-Making in the CICU 1. “Much of what we do in cardiology is thinking about how to make people feel better (not just improving cardiac function or length of life). So, on a day-to-day basis we are really providing primary palliative care.” – Dr. Larry Allen 2. “Risk models in cardiology can only be so accurate… While risk models can give us some grounding, we also need to embrace the concept of uncertainty, and help patients understand that there are a variety of things that might happen to them, suggest some things they might plan for, and continue to iteratively come back to the patient and reevaluate what their options are.” – Dr. Larry Allen 3. “Our goal is to help people live happy, healthy, full lives. But, everyone dies. So understanding that death is a part of life and understanding how to help them make those transitions is critical” – Dr. Larry Allen 4. “Having good deaths is a part of good healthcare. We can’t ignore that. We can’t fight against it. We should embrace it. And we have the opportunity to do that.” – Dr. Larry Allen 5. We should still keep in mind the concept of medical futility and determining what options are reasonable for patients. Part of shared decision-making includes discussing what interventions would not be feasible or helpful with patients and families Show notes – Palliative Care and Shared Decision-Making in the CICU Notes drafted by Dr. Sarah Chuzi. 1. How are the basic principles of palliative care relevant to cardiology, and can you define the key concepts of shared decision-making, primary palliative care, specialty (or secondary) palliative care, and hospice care? Throughout medicine, we confront the concepts of symptom control, difficult medical decision-making, and end-of-life. These are the principles of palliative care and they apply very easily across the spectrum of cardiology. Shared decision-making is a meeting between two experts – the patient and the clinician. The patient is the expert in what’s important to them and their hopes, fears, values, goals, and preferences. The clinician is the expert in the medical aspects of care, including care that is not possible, care that might be high value, and the potential trade-offs and range of outcomes involved in a medical decision. Palliative care is defined by the WHO – as care that deals with patient symptoms and quality of life. Increasingly, the terms primary and secondary palliative care are used. Primary palliative care is care provided by a general clinician (or cardiologist), while secondary palliative care is provided by a board-certified palliative care clinician. Hospice care is really a health insurance benefit that provides a certain group of services (e.g. nurses, equipment) for patients who have terminal illness and less than 6 months to live. 2. What have we learned from existing trials looking at specialty palliative care in heart failure? A few large trials (CASA, ENABLE, SWAP-HF, PAL-HF) of specialty palliative care interventions in heart failure have shown mixed results. One of the reasons for this is the heterogeneity in patient and caregiver adjustment/symptoms at baseline. Future trials will need to determine which patients and caregivers are really in need of interventions or assistance surrounding some of these issues.  3. What are some strategies trainees can use to help elucidate a patient’s goals and values and engage in shared decision-making in high intensity, critical care situations? Trying to determine (from the patient or family) whether the patient is a medical maximizer or minimizer can be helpful; i.e., what is his preference for aggressiveness of care. Obtaining collateral from a patient’s power of attorney/next of kin/proxy about prior discussions regarding goals and values is valuable. We should still keep in mind the concept of medical futility and determining what options are reasonable for patients. Part of shared decision-making includes discussing what interventions would not feasible or helpful with patients and families. 4. What is the role of decision aids in the process of deciding whether to pursue LVAD implantation? Decision aids are unique from educational materials in that decision aids discuss alternative treatment options, including what life might be like if a certain treatment option is not pursued. Decision aids encourage patients to reflect on their values and then try to map the decisions in the context of their values. The research group at the University of Colorado developed a decision aid to help patients and their families determine whether an LVAD would be an appropriate medical intervention for them. The decision aid is available online (patientdecisionaid.org) and includes a 26-minute video and an 8-page pamphlet. Currently, they are being disseminated nationally in a large implementation trial. The DECIDE-LVAD trial demonstrated that this decision aid improved values-choice concordance for patients considering LVAD therapy. 5. What are the benefits of hospice for patients with cardiac disease and how does hospice fall short? It’s important to understand what hospice will and will not cover. The hospice benefit is a fixed payment per day. So, it’s important to consider what treatments might be covered and to discuss this with patients and families.  For patients with advanced cardiac disease, coverage of inotropes is a common issue that we encounter. It’s important to prepare patients for the fact that inotropes may not be accepted in a given hospice program. Additionally, sometimes clinicians struggle with how to continue to provide care for patients who enter hospice as we try to navigate how to stay involved in their care while respecting their wishes to be at home and not necessarily come to clinic. References – Palliative Care and Shared Decision-Making in the CICU Rogers JG, Patel CB, Mentz RJ, et al. The palliative care in heart failure (PAL-HF) randomized, controlled clinical trial. 2017. J Am Coll Cardiol, 70(3): 331-341. Allen LA, Mcilvennan CK, Thompson JS, et al. Effectiveness of an intervention supporting shared decision making for destination therapy left ventricular assist device: the DECIDE-LVAD randomized clinical trial. 2018. JAMA Intern Med, 178(4): 520-529. Warraich HJ, Patel CB, Kochar A, Rogers JG, Patel MR. Incorporating shared decision making and palliative care into cardiogenic shock pathways. 2010. J Am Coll Cardiol, 74(4): 501-502. Chuzi S, Khan SS, Pak ES. Primary palliative care education in advanced heart failure and transplant cardiology fellowships. 2021. J Am Coll Cardiol, 77(4): 501-505.  

Partial anomalous pulmonary venous return refers to anomalies in which one or more (but not all) of the pulmonary veins connects to a location other than the left atrium. This causes left to right shunting which may have hemodynamic and therefore clinical significance, warranting repair in some patients. Join CardioNerds to learn about partial anomalous pulmonary venous return! Dr. Dan Ambinder (CardioNerds co-founder), Dr. Josh Saef (ACHD FIT at the University of Pennsylvania and ACHD Series co-chair), and Dr. Tripti Gupta (ACHD FIT at Vanderbilt University and episode lead) learn from Dr. Ian Harris (Director of the Adult Congenital Heart Disease program at University of California, San Francisco). Audio editing by CardioNerds Academy Intern, student doctor Shivani Reddy. Enjoy this Circulation 2022 Paths to Discovery article to learn about the CardioNerds story, mission, and values. The CardioNerds Adult Congenital Heart Disease (ACHD) series provides a comprehensive curriculum to dive deep into the labyrinthine world of congenital heart disease with the aim of empowering every CardioNerd to help improve the lives of people living with congenital heart disease. This series is multi-institutional collaborative project made possible by contributions of stellar fellow leads and expert faculty from several programs, led by series co-chairs, Dr. Josh Saef, Dr. Agnes Koczo, and Dr. Dan Clark. The CardioNerds Adult Congenital Heart Disease Series is developed in collaboration with the Adult Congenital Heart Association, The CHiP Network, and Heart University. See more Disclosures: None Pearls • Notes • References • Guest Profiles • Production Team CardioNerds Adult Congenital Heart Disease PageCardioNerds Episode PageCardioNerds AcademyCardionerds Healy Honor Roll CardioNerds Journal ClubSubscribe to The Heartbeat Newsletter!Check out CardioNerds SWAG!Become a CardioNerds Patron! Pearls – Partial Anomalous Pulmonary Venous Return (PAPVR) What is partial anomalous pulmonary venous return (PAPVR)? PAPVR refers to anomalies in which one or more (but not all) of the pulmonary veins connects to a location other than the left atrium. Often, this means one or more pulmonary veins empty into the right atrium or a systemic vein such as the superior vena cava or inferior vena cava. Physiologically, this produces a left-to-right shunt, allowing for already-oxygenated blood to recirculate into the lungs and result in excessive pulmonary blood flow.  What are the clinical features of PAPVR? Diagnosis is usually incidental on a cross sectional imaging such as CTA or CMR. The most common associated lesion is an atrial-level defect. It is unusual for a single anomalous pulmonary venous connection of only 1 pulmonary lobe to result in significant shunting. Patients with a significant degree of left to right shunting may have right heart dilatation or symptoms of dyspnea on exertion. When are some strategies for managing patients with PAPVR? A surgical correction is recommended for patients with PAPVR when functional capacity is impaired and RV enlargement is present, there is a net left-to-right shunt sufficiently large to cause physiological sequelae (aka: ratio of pulmonary flow (Qp) to systemic flow (Qs) is > 1.5:1), PA systolic pressure is less than 50% systemic pressure and pulmonary venous resistance is less than one third of systemic venous resistance. Surgical repair involves intracaval baffling of the left atrium (Warden procedure) or direct reimplantation of the anomalous pulmonary vein into the left atrium. Pregnancy is well tolerated in patients with repaired PAPVR. In patients with unrepaired lesion who may have right sided heart dilatation and/or pulmonary hypertension, preconception evaluation and counseling should address how pregnancy may affect mother’s and fetus’s health. Antibiotic prophylaxis for infective endocarditis is typically not needed unless patients are less than 6 months from recent surgery, have residual defect at the patch margin or prior history of infective endocarditis. Show notes – Partial Anomalous Pulmonary Venous Return (PAPVR) Notes (drafted by Dr. Tripti Gupta): 1. What is partial anomalous pulmonary venous return? Anatomically, partial anomalous pulmonary venous return refers to anomalies in which one or more (but not all) of the pulmonary veins connects to a location other than the left atrium. Often, this means one or more pulmonary veins empty into the right atrium or a systemic vein such as the superior vena cava (SVC) or inferior vena cava (IVC). Physiologically, this produces a left-to-right shunt, allowing for already-oxygenated blood to recirculate into the lungs and result in excessive pulmonary blood flow.  If all pulmonary veins from both lungs drain to an anomalous site or in an abnormal fashion, then it is identified as a total anomalous pulmonary venous return (TAPVR). Patients with TAPVR often require surgical intervention in childhood. A bit of a nuance in terminology – partial anomalous pulmonary venous return (PAPVR) vs. partial anomalous pulmonary venous connection (PAPVC), requires some explanation. The suffix “return” refers to vessels returning to a chamber (ex: pulmonary vein returns to morphological left atrium after blood functionally mixes with systemic venous return or is redirected via an atrial septal defect) vs. “connection” implies abnormal anatomic attachments.  2. How does this happen? What is the embryological explanation for PAPVR? We know that the pulmonary veins originate from the posterior aspect of the left atrium. Meanwhile, the lung buds that arise from the lung parenchyma canalize as a vessel and gradually connect to the developing pulmonary veins. Some theories say that the lung buds are initially enmeshed in the splanchnic plexus which drains into the cardinal and umbilical vitelline veins (systemic venous system). By week 4 of gestation, the pulmonary veins from the left atrium connects with the superior portion of the splanchnic plexus to form the pulmonary plexus and ultimately loses its connection with the splanchnic plexus. The pulmonary vein is then supposed to divide into 4 branches, 2 on right and 2 on left, each with an orifice at the left atrium. Failure of one or more of the pulmonary veins to separate from the systemic venous systemic results in PAPVC/TAPVC. 3. What are some major clinical findings in PAPVR? PAPVR is typically an incidental diagnosis on CT or MRI in asymptomatic patients when these scans are done for another reason. Many patients with PAPVR may remain asymptomatic throughout childhood and adult life. Physiological changes may depend on degree of left to right shunt, number of veins involved, their sites of connection and associated lesions. 80% of anomalous connections are of the right sided pulmonary veins and 20% affect the left sided pulmonary veins. The most common variants include: Right upper pulmonary vein or right middle pulmonary vein to SVC, azygos vein, or right atrium. This variant is the most common and can be often associated with a sinus venosus defect. Right pulmonary veins to IVC, usually via a single trunk draining caudally and connecting to the IVC near the diaphragm. This variant is sometimes known as Scimitar syndrome. When you look at the descending trunk connecting the right venous return to the right atrium on x-ray or fluoroscopy, it has a crescent-like shape, like a Turkish sword from the Ottoman Empire or a scimitar, hence the name Scimitar syndrome. Left pulmonary vein(s) to the innominate vein via a vertical vein. Left pulmonary veins to the coronary sinus. If more that 50% of a person’s pulmonary venous return drains anomalously to the right side of the heart, there may be right heart enlargement and presentation of symptoms such as dyspnea on exertion earlier in life. Physical exam findings may include prominent right ventricular impulse, a systolic ejection murmur at the left upper sternal border, split S2, and possibly a mid-diastolic rumble. In the absence of an ASD, these findings may not be obvious. On ECG, a RBBB morphology, RAD or first-degree heart block is associated with right ventricular volume enlargement. On echocardiogram, RV enlargement without left heart dysfunction should raise suspicion for anomalous pulmonary venous connection. Other hints can include the presence of a sinus venosus ASD, secundum ASD or RV enlargement that is significantly large for a small ASD/PFO. While left sided pulmonary veins can be visualized on the suprasternal view of transthoracic echocardiogram, right sided veins are more challenging on TTE. A TEE can be used to identify the site and drainage of pulmonary veins. A right heart catheterization is useful to identify the presence and etiology of pulmonary hypertension and quantify flows in pulmonary and systemic system and presence of a shunt. Selective angiography of the right and left pulmonary arteries can confirm the presence and course of pulmonary veins on levophase. A gated cardiac CTA or CMR is helpful and recommended for definitive diagnosis. A CTA offers higher spatial resolution than a CMR at the cost of radiation and iodinated contrast exposure. A CMR offers high resolution for defining vascular anatomy, quantifying chamber dimensions, estimate shunt burden and degree of stenoses using flow quantification techniques. In addition, respiratory-gated 3D whole heart imaging or MRA can be used for multiplanar reconstruction and aid in perioperative planning. Patients with TAPVR present with cyanosis at birth and need urgent surgical correction. 4. What conditions are associated with PAPVR? 80% of patients with PAPVR lesion may have an associated atrial level defect. In particular, a superior sinus venosus defect is frequently associated with right sided anomalous pulmonary venous connections. Other associated cardiac lesions include conotruncal abnormalities such as Tetralogy of Fallot or double outlet right ventricle, ventricular septal defects, and valvular abnormalities such as pulmonary stenosis, mitral or aortic stenosis or atresia and aortic arch anomalies. Anomalous pulmonary venous connections can also be seen in patients with heterotaxy syndrome, where mispositioned organs such as the heart, lungs, stomach, intestines, and liver may be in nonstandard locations within the chest and abdomen. 5. What are some main considerations for surgical repair for PAPVR? Cross sectional imaging such as CTA or CMR may be helpful to identify pulmonary venous connections and other extracardiac vascular anatomy. It is unusual for a single anomalous pulmonary venous connection of only 1 pulmonary lobe to result in a sufficient volume load to justify surgical repair. However, if a patient has symptoms referable to the shunt, there is >1 anomalous vein, and a moderate or large left-to-right shunt, then surgical repair is associated with a reduction in RV size and PA pressure. Pulmonary hypertension is a risk for adverse outcomes with surgery. A hemodynamic assessment with may help identify pressures, saturations, and degree of shunting. A surgical correction is recommended for patients with PAPVR when functional capacity is impaired and RV enlargement is present, there is a net left-to-right shunt sufficiently large to cause physiological sequelae (aka: ratio of pulmonary flow (Qp) to systemic flow (Qs) is > 1.5:1), PA systolic pressure is less than 50% systemic pressure and pulmonary venous resistance is less than one third of systemic venous resistance. Surgery can involve intracaval baffling of the left atrium (warden procedure) or direct reimplantation of the anomalous pulmonary vein directly into the left atrium. Repair of PAPVR may be considered at the time of closure of sinus venosus or other ASD. Transcatheter therapies are an area of ongoing innovation. References – Partial Anomalous Pulmonary Venous Return (PAPVR) Gatzoullis MA, Webb GD, Daubeney PEF. Chapter 37: Partial Anomalous Pulmonary Venous Connections and Scimitar Syndrome In: Diagnosis and Management of Adult Congenital Heart Disease. 3rd ed. Elsevier Health Sciences; 2017: 354-361 Kao CC, Hsieh CC, Cheng PJ et al. Total Anomalous Pulmonary Venous Connection: From Embryology to a Prenatal Ultrasound Diagnostic Update. J Med Ultrasound. Sep 2017; 25 (3): 130-137 Pendela VS, Tan BEX, Chowdhury M, Chow M. Partial Anomalous Pulmonary Venous Return Presenting in Adults: A Case Series with Review of Literature. Cureus. 2020 Jun 1; 12 (6): e8388 Stout KK, Daniels CJ, Aboulhosn JA, et al. 2018 AHA/ACC Guideline for the Management of Adults With Congenital Heart Disease: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Clinical Practice Guidelines. Circulation. Apr 2 2019;139(14):e698-e800. Meet Our Collaborators! Adult Congenital Heart AssociationFounded in 1998, the Adult Congenital Heart Association is an organization begun by and dedicated to supporting individuals and families living with congenital heart disease and advancing the care and treatment available to our community. Our mission is to empower the congenital heart disease community by advancing access to resources and specialized care that improve patient-centered outcomes. Visit their website (https://www.achaheart.org/) for information on their patient advocacy efforts, educational material, and membership for patients and providers CHiP Network The CHiP network is a non-profit organization aiming to connect congenital heart professionals around the world. Visit their website (thechipnetwork.org) and become a member to access free high-quality educational material, upcoming news and events, and the fantastic monthly Journal Watch, keeping you up to date with congenital scientific releases. Visit their website (https://thechipnetwork.org/) for more information. Heart UniversityHeart University aims to be “the go-to online resource” for e-learning in CHD and paediatric-acquired heart disease. It is a carefully curated open access library of educational material for all providers of care to children and adults with CHD or children with acquired heart disease, whether a trainee or a practicing provider. The site provides free content to a global audience in two broad domains: 1. A comprehensive curriculum of training modules and associated testing for trainees. 2. A curated library of conference and grand rounds recordings for continuing medical education. Learn more at www.heartuniversity.org/ CardioNerds Adult Congenital Heart Disease Production Team Amit Goyal, MD Daniel Ambinder, MD

It’s another session of CardioNerds Rounds! In these rounds, Dr. Loie Farina (Advanced Heart Failure and Transplant Fellow at Northwestern University) joins Dr. Jane Wilcox (Chief of the Section of Heart Failure Treatment and Recovery at Northwestern University) to discuss the nuances of HFpEF diagnosis and management. Dr. Wilcox is also the Associate Director of the T1 Center for Cardiovascular Therapeutics in the Bluhm Cardiovascular Institute and Director of the Myocardial Recovery Clinic at Northwestern University. Dr. Wilcox is a prolific researcher, clinician, and thought leader in Heart Failure and we are honored to have her on CardioNerds Rounds! Notes were drafted by Dr. Karan Desai. Audio editing by CardioNerds Academy Intern, student doctor Akiva Rosenzveig. Enjoy this Circulation 2022 Paths to Discovery article to learn about the CardioNerds story, mission, and values. This episode is supported with unrestricted funding from Zoll LifeVest. A special thank you to Mitzy Applegate and Ivan Chevere for their production skills that help make CardioNerds Rounds such an amazing success. All CardioNerds content is planned, produced, and reviewed solely by CardioNerds. Case details are altered to protect patient health information. CardioNerds Rounds is co-chaired by Dr. Karan Desai and Dr. Natalie Stokes.  Speaker disclosures: None Challenging Cases – Atrial Fibrillation with Dr. Hugh Calkins CardioNerds Rounds PageCardioNerds Episode PageCardioNerds AcademyCardionerds Healy Honor Roll CardioNerds Journal ClubSubscribe to The Heartbeat Newsletter!Check out CardioNerds SWAG!Become a CardioNerds Patron! Show notes – HFpEF Diagnosis and Management Case #1 Synopsis: A woman in her 80s with a history of HFpEF presented with worsening dyspnea on exertion over the course of a year but significantly worsening over the past two months. Her other history includes prior breast cancer with chemotherapy and radiation therapy, permanent atrial fibrillation with AV node ablation and CRT-P, and CKD Stage III. She presented for an outpatient RHC with exercise to further characterize her HFpEF. Her echo showed normal LV size, no LVH, LVEF of 50%, decreased RV systolic function, severe left atrial enlargement, significantly elevated E/e’ and mild MR. Right heart catheterization showed moderately elevated bi-ventricular filling pressures at rest but with passive leg raise and Stage 1 exercise the wedge pressure rose significantly. We were asked to comment on management. Case #1 Takeaways Amongst the things that were discussed were the role of specific therapies in symptomatic patients with HFpEF. In patients with HFpEF and documented congestion, they will require diuretic therapy for symptomatic relief. But in addition to diuretic therapy, we discussed starting HFpEF-specific therapies. Amongst, those specific therapies mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist (MRA) and sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitor. In multiple trials that have included patients with HFPEF, SGLT2i have reduced the risk of hospitalization. This includes the EMPEROR-PRESERVED Trial (see the CardioNerds Journal Club discussion on the trial) in which nearly 6000 patients with NYHA Class II-IV symptoms, EF > 40% and elevated NT-proBNP with a prior HF hospitalization within the past 12 months were randomized to Empagliflozin or placebo. The primary outcome – death from CV causes or hospitalization for Heart Failure – was significantly lower in the SGLT2i arm (13.8% vs 17.1%, 95% CI 0.69-0.90, P <0.001). In regards to MRA, an important trial was the TOPCAT trial which randomized patients with symptomatic HF and LVEF > 45% to receive either spironolactone or placebo. The primary endpoint (death from CV cause, aborted cardiac arrest, or hospitalization for HF) was not statistically different between treatment arms. Of note, however, there were concerns for regional differences which is outlined well in this NEJM Evidence piece. Case #2 Synopsis: A woman in her 70s with history of hypertension, obesity, and COPD presented to the office for an evaluation of dyspnea. She had noted two years of dyspnea with moderate exercise and had developed lower extremity swelling. She had an echocardiogram that showed normal LV size and function, no LVH, global longitudinal strain at -21% (normal), grade 1 diastolic dysfunction and mild left atrial enlargement. Amongst the initial questions we were asked was how would we approach the diagnostic evaluation of her dyspnea? Case #2 Takeaways There were several things we covered with Dr. Wilcox regarding this patient. One of the things we discussed was whether the patient has HFpEF and then concomitantly, if we suspect and confirm HFpEF, attempting to elucidate an etiology for the patient’s HFpEF. There are diagnostic scores, such as the H2FPEF score that can estimate the probability of HFpEF versus a non-cardiac cause of a patient’s symptoms. There are limitations to the scoring systems – including echocardiographic parameters that may not be available at point of care or prone to error – but it can refine a clinician’s pre-test probability for HFpEF. Amongst other testing, an important note is that coronary artery disease is common in patients with HFpEF and may be a potentially treatable and reversible cause of HFpEF. Thus, evaluation for ischemia is recommended and given a Class IIa recommendation in the 2022 ACC/AHA/HFSA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure. References – HFpEF Diagnosis and Management Anker SD, Butler J, Filippatos G et al; EMPEROR-Preserved Trial Investigators. Empagliflozin in Heart Failure with a Preserved Ejection Fraction. N Engl J Med. 2021 Oct 14;385(16):1451-1461. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa2107038. Epub 2021 Aug 27. PMID: 34449189. Heidenreich P, Bozkurt B, Aguilar D, et al. 2022 AHA/ACC/HFSA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2022 May, 79 (17) e263–e421. Pfeffer MA, Claggett B, Assmann SF et al. Regional variation in patients and outcomes in the Treatment of Preserved Cardiac Function Heart Failure with an Aldosterone Antagonist (TOPCAT) trial. Circulation2015; 131:34-42.25406305 Pitt B, Pfeffer MA, Assmann SF, et al. Spironolactone for heart failure with preserved ejection fraction. N Engl J Med2014; 370:1383-1392. 10.1056/NEJMoa1313731 24716680. Reddy YNV, Carter RE, Obokata M et al. A Simple, Evidence-Based Approach to Help Guide Diagnosis of Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction. Circulation. 2018 Aug 28;138(9):861-870. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.118.034646. PMID: 29792299; PMCID: PMC6202181. Production Team Karan Desai, MD Natalie Stokes, MD Amit Goyal, MD Daniel Ambinder, MD

As the burden of cardiovascular disease increases in the United States, the importance of enhanced screening tools, early risk prediction, and prevention strategies grows. Novel risk scoring methods, including polygenic risk scores (PRS), may help identify patients that benefit from early intervention and risk modification. In this episode, we discuss how a PRS is calculated, how to incorporate a PRS into clinical practice, and current barriers to the equitable implementation of risk scores. In terms of frontiers in clinical genetics we also discuss the burgeoning field of pharmacogenetics and how pharmacogenetics may be used to identify responders and non-responders to certain therapies. Join CardioNerds Dr. Jessie Holtzman (CardioNerds Academy Chief and Chief Resident and soon FIT at UCSF), Dr. Alaa Diab (CardioNerds Academy Fellow and Medicine Resident at GBMC), and student doctor Hirsh Elhence (CardioNerds Academy Intern and medical student at USC Keck School of Medicine) as they discuss frontiers in clinical genetics with Dr. Pradeep Natarajan (Director of Preventive Cardiology, Massachusetts General Hospital). Audio editing by CardioNerds Academy Intern, student doctor Akiva Rosenzveig. This episode was developed in collaboration with the American Society of Preventive Cardiology and is supported with unrestricted educational funds from Illumina, Inc. All CardioNerds content is planned, produced, and reviewed solely by CardioNerds. This CardioNerds Cardiovascular Genomics series is a multi-institutional collaboration made possible by contributions of stellar fellow leads and expert faculty from several programs. Enjoy this Circulation 2022 Paths to Discovery article to learn about the CardioNerds story, mission, and values. Pearls • Notes • References CardioNerds Cardiovascular Genomics PageCardioNerds Episode PageCardioNerds AcademyCardionerds Healy Honor Roll CardioNerds Journal ClubSubscribe to The Heartbeat Newsletter!Check out CardioNerds SWAG!Become a CardioNerds Patron! Pearls – Frontiers in Clinical Genetics in Cardiovascular Prevention For common diseases like coronary artery disease, rare mutations may confer a several-fold increased risk of disease – for instance, in familial hypercholesterolemia, a single rare mutation may confer as much as a three-fold increase in risk of coronary artery disease. However, for most common diseases, the overall cumulative impact of several common genetic variants may be greater than that of a monogenetic trait. Family history is a particularly coarse predictor of CV risk, highlighting the need for polygenic risk scores. In particular, younger patients with borderline cardiovascular risk may benefit from the use of a polygenic risk score in the determination of their overall cardiovascular risk profile. A polygenic risk score (PRS) is a weighted sum of several risk-conferring alleles. The weight assigned to an allele is determined by the strength of the association between the allele and CV disease, as determined by genome-wide association studies (GWAS). The data used for genome-wide associated studies in cardiovascular disease have historically included populations primarily of European ancestry. However, more data is being collected from diverse patient cohorts to increase the external validity and broader applicability of such studies. Pharmacogenetic polygenic risk scores may be used to predict drug efficacy and toxicity, as well as to identify biologically plausible drug targets for clinical trial design. Show notes – Frontiers in Clinical Genetics in Cardiovascular Prevention What is a polygenic risk score (PRS)? Monogenic conditions are those in which a variant in a single gene causes a pathological phenotype. For example, familial hypercholesterolemia is often the result of a mutated allele in the LDL receptor gene. In contrast, polygenic risk suggests that there are variants in multiple genes that all confer risk independently, each with a small individual effect size. By aggregating many variants, a risk score may be able to provide an estimate as to the degree of one’s risk of cardiovascular disease. By comparing the allele frequencies of genes between patients with and without cardiovascular disease, risk-conferring alleles may be identified. These studies are called genome-wide association studies (GWAS). From GWAS, PRS can then be calculated by aggregating several risk-conferring alleles. What is the clinical utility of PRS? Current uses of PRS Family history is a coarse predictor of CV disease. The addition of a PRS to a risk assessment may improve the clinician’s ability to risk stratify patients. Calculating PRS can help identify patients who need early intervention, even in the absence of traditional risk factors (such as hypercholesterolemia or diabetes mellitus). For example, imagine a patient in the top 20th percentile for polygenic risk with a relatively normal LDL. Despite the lack of hyperlipidemia, some evidence may suggest that a statin or aggressive lifestyle modification would lower CV risk in this patient. In particular, for younger patients with borderline CV risk (as measured by traditional risk factors such as blood pressure, age, etc.), a high PRS might promote aggressive lifestyle modification or pharmacotherapy. Potential future uses Pharmacogenomics – Understanding a patient’s genotype may help identify responders and non-responders to certain medications. For example, CYP2C19 is an enzyme that aids in the activation of Clopidogrel. Therefore, patients with a mutation in CYP2C19 may not respond as robustly to Clopidogrel and therefore alternate pharmacotherapy would be recommended. What are the barriers to equity? Historically, GWAS studies largely enrolled patients of European ancestry. As such, the external validity of PRS outside of populations of European descent has been questioned. The NIH has prioritized capturing data from more diverse cohorts, associated with an increase in databases including patients of more varied ancestry. The availability of direct-to-consumer genome sequencing kits may make calculating PRS more feasible for the broader population. However, such tests remain limited in their utility without interpretation by genetic counselors or cardiovascular geneticists. References – Frontiers in Clinical Genetics in Cardiovascular Prevention Khera AV, Chaffin M, Aragam KG, Haas ME, Roselli C, Choi SH, Natarajan P, Lander ES, Lubitz SA, Ellinor PT, Kathiresan S. Genome-wide polygenic scores for common diseases identify individuals with risk equivalent to monogenic mutations. Nat Genet. 2018 Sep;50(9):1219-1224. doi: 10.1038/s41588-018-0183-z. Epub 2018 Aug 13. PMID: 30104762; PMCID: PMC6128408. O’Sullivan JW, Raghavan S, Marquez-Luna C, Luzum JA, Damrauer SM, Ashley EA, O’Donnell CJ, Willer CJ, Natarajan P; American Heart Association Council on Genomic and Precision Medicine; Council on Clinical Cardiology; Council on Arteriosclerosis, Thrombosis and Vascular Biology; Council on Cardiovascular Radiology and Intervention; Council on Lifestyle and Cardiometabolic Health; and Council on Peripheral Vascular Disease. Polygenic Risk Scores for Cardiovascular Disease: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association. Circulation. 2022 Aug 23;146(8):e93-e118. doi: 10.1161/CIR.0000000000001077. Epub 2022 Jul 18. PMID: 35862132.

In this episode, we discuss the utility of veno-arterial extra-corporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) for the temporary management of biventricular failure and cardiogenic shock requiring full cardiopulmonary support. Here, we define the types of ECMO and describe the unique physiology of this mechanical circulatory support platform, as well as review the potential complications and management strategies. Most notably, we highlight indications for and contraindications to the use of VA-ECMO and review the importance of patient selection.  Lastly, we discuss de-escalation and de-cannulation strategies for patients on VA-ECMO as a bridge to recovery. Join Dr. Amit Goyal (CardioNerds Cofounder and FIT at Cleveland Clinic), Dr. Yoav Karpenshif (Series Co-chair and FIT at University of Pennsylvania), and Dr. Megan Burke (Episode FIT Lead and FIT at University of Pennsylvania) as they learn about how to care for some of our sickest patients from Dr. Ann Gage, interventional and critical care cardiologist at Centennial Heart. At the beginning of the episode, enjoy a message from the very first CardioNerds Scholar, Dr. Katie Vaughan (Chief Resident and soon Cardiology Fellow at BIDMC). Episode notes were developed by Dr. Megan Burke. Audio editing by CardioNerds Academy Intern, Hirsh Elhence. The CardioNerds Cardiac Critical Care Series is a multi-institutional collaboration made possible by contributions of stellar fellow leads and expert faculty from several programs, led by series co-chairs, Dr. Mark Belkin, Dr. Eunice Dugan, Dr. Karan Desai, and Dr. Yoav Karpenshif. Enjoy this Circulation 2022 Paths to Discovery article to learn about the CardioNerds story, mission, and values. Pearls • Notes • References • Production Team CardioNerds Cardiac Critical Care PageCardioNerds Episode PageCardioNerds AcademyCardionerds Healy Honor Roll CardioNerds Journal ClubSubscribe to The Heartbeat Newsletter!Check out CardioNerds SWAG!Become a CardioNerds Patron! Pearls and Quotes – Biventricular Failure and the Use of VA-ECMO Veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) is a form of temporary mechanical circulatory support that can do the work of both the heart and lungs. The ECMO circuit is a narcissist, i.e. cannulas are named in reference to the circuit and not the patient (“inflow” vs “outflow”). The decision to utilize ECMO should be made by a multidisciplinary shock team and patient selection is KEY! ECMO physiology rule #1: VA-ECMO increases LV afterload Patients on VA-ECMO should be monitored with a PA catheter and an arterial line in the right arm Show notes – Biventricular Failure and the Use of VA-ECMO Notes drafted by Dr. Megan Burke. 1. What is ECMO and what are the different types? Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is a temporary form of mechanical life support that comes in two flavors: veno-arterial, or “VA” and veno-venous, or “VV.”  VV-ECMO supports extracorporeal gas exchange in the setting of acute respiratory failure VA-ECMO provides full circulatory support in addition to gas exchange, doing the work of both the heart and lungs.  2. What are the components and “anatomy” of the VA-ECMO circuit? The circuit is made up of the following major components: Venous (inflow) cannula Centrifugal Pump Oxygenator (also responsible for CO2 removal) Arterial (outflow) cannula The cannulas are named in reference to the ECMO circuit, not the patient. Dr. Gage suggests that we think of the ECMO circuit (and mechanical circulatory support in general) as narcissistic, i.e. flow is always in reference to the device. Gas exchange happens in the oxygenator. In the oxygenator blood flows through thin filaments that allow for diffusion of oxygen and carbon dioxide. Gas flows in the opposite direction of blood flow to maximize diffusion through the countercurrent effect. Oxygenation is determined by rate of blood flow through the oxygenator and FiO2 delivered. Carbon dioxide removal is determined by rate of countercurrent gas flow, referred to as the sweep speed. 3. What are the indications for VA-ECMO? VA-ECMO is utilized in the setting of severe refractory cardiogenic shock (in the setting of left, right, or biventricular failure) and cardiac arrest. It is a temporary mechanical circulatory support platform, and should be used as a bridge to recovery or a more durable therapy (i.e. durable mechanical support or transplant). Due to lack of randomized data, there are no consensus guidelines for the use of VA-ECMO, and the decision to implement it should be made as part of a multidisciplinary cardiogenic shock team. Common indications include cardiogenic shock, refractory ventricular arrhythmias, massive pulmonary embolism, cardiac arrest, and failure to wean from cardiopulmonary bypass during surgery. The absolute and relative contra-indications to ECMO vary by institution. Given the high mortality rates for patients on VA-ECMO (hospital mortality is approximately 50%, and 6-month survival is as low as 30%), patient selection is key. There are multiple pre VA-ECMO risk factors independently associated with poor outcomes. These include older age, female sex, higher body mass index, and markers of increased severity of illness including laboratory evidence of end-organ dysfunction and longer duration of mechanical ventilation. 4. What are the pathophysiological consequences of VA-ECMO and how do we monitor and treat them? The goal of VA-ECMO is to provide perfusion, however unlike other forms of mechanical circulatory support, it is NOT supporting the heart’s ability to pump blood. In fact, VA-ECMO increases left ventricular afterload, because blood enters the aorta from the outflow cannula somewhere between the aortic root and the diaphragm (depending on cannulation strategy). This creates increased aortic pressure and increased left ventricular volume and afterload, which can lead to pulmonary edema and worsened myocardial demand. In the most extreme cases, the aortic pressure can exceed the left ventricular systolic pressure, thereby preventing blood from ejecting from the LV. This can lead to stasis, thrombus formation, and strokes. For this reason, echocardiography is used frequently to monitor LV ejection. One key marker is the opening of the aortic valve with every beat. Furthermore, hemodynamic monitoring with a pulmonary artery catheter and a RIGHT radial arterial line is essential for management of patient’s on ECMO. The PA catheter allows for an estimation of the filling pressures. Of note, the mixed venous O2 cannot be used to estimate cardiac output when a patient is on VA-ECMO, but low levels still do correlate with poor tissue perfusion and worse outcomes. In general, it is essential to have an arterial catheter in a patient on VA-ECMO to monitor for arterial pulsatility, which is a surrogate for the contribution of the patient’s heart to perfusion. Specifically, a RIGHT radial arterial line is key in these patients because blood from it originates the brachiocephalic artery, which is the closest branch in the aortic arch to the coronary arteries and great vessels of the aortic arch and therefore best estimates the oxygen content in the coronaries and brain. This is key because when a patient is on peripheral VA-ECMO, oxygenated blood arrives to the heart retrograde from the femoral artery. If the left ventricle retains or regains contractility, the poorly oxygenated blood from the lungs (in patients with concurrent significant respiratory failure) is ejected into the proximal aorta. This can lead to the so called “North-south” or “Harlequin” syndrome, where the head and right upper extremity are relatively hypoxic compared to the rest of the body. Arterial blood gases from a right radial arterial line can forewarn of possible coronary and cerebral hypoxia during LV recovery as this syndrome develops and the “mixing” cloud develops. For patients with poor ejection, there are various strategies to decompress, or “vent,” the left ventricle. Strategies include use of medicines to reduce afterload and/or improve inotropy, creation of an atrial septal defect to offload the left heart, and use of temporary mechanical circulatory support devices (IABP or percutaneous LVAD) to allow blood to more easily leave the LV. Treatment of the North-South Syndrome focuses on increasing the oxygenation of blood ejecting from the left ventricle through vent management or adding another venous catheter to pre-oxygenate blood before entering the lungs (VAV-ECMO). Increasing VA-ECMO flow can also shift the mixing zone towards the aortic arch and improve oxygenation, but this will also increase the LV afterload. Other complications of the ECMO circuit include infection, bleeding, and limb ischemia (due to the large bore vascular access), as well as stroke, hemolysis, and thrombus formation (due to the extracorporeal circuitry). 5. How is VA-ECMO weaned? If a patient is on VA-ECMO support as a bridge to recovery, the ability to wean a patient off the circuit relies on invasive hemodynamics, echocardiography, and an assessment of improving end-organ function. The flow of blood out of the circuit can be gradually weaned down to allow for the patient’s native heart to do more of the work of perfusion. Once the patient is thought to be ready for decannulation it is common to perform a turndown study under echocardiographic guidance, where serial evaluations of biventricular function are done at different flow speeds. VA-ECMO is usually decannulated in the operating room to allow for surgical repair of the vasculature in the setting of large bore access. References – Biventricular Failure and the Use of VA-ECMO Papolos AI, Kenigsberg BB, Berg DD, Alviar CL, Bohula E, Burke JA, Carnicelli AP, Chaudhry SP, Drakos S, Gerber DA, Guo J, Horowitz JM, Katz JN, Keeley EC, Metkus TS, Nativi-Nicolau J, Snell JR, Sinha SS, Tymchak WJ, Van Diepen S, Morrow DA, Barnett CF; Critical Care Cardiology Trials Network Investigators. Management and Outcomes of Cardiogenic Shock in Cardiac ICUs With Versus Without Shock Teams. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2021 Sep 28;78(13):1309-1317. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2021.07.044. PMID: 34556316. Burkhoff D, Sayer G, Doshi D, Uriel N. Hemodynamics of Mechanical Circulatory Support. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2015;66(23):2663-2674. doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2015.10.017 Guglin M, Zucker MJ, Bazan VM, et al. Venoarterial ECMO for Adults: JACC Scientific Expert Panel. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2019;73(6):698-716. doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2018.11.038 Keebler ME, Haddad EV, Choi CW, et al. Venoarterial Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation in Cardiogenic Shock. JACC Heart Fail. 2018;6(6):503-516. doi:10.1016/j.jchf.2017.11.017 Rao P, Khalpey Z, Smith R, Burkhoff D, Kociol RD. Venoarterial Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation for Cardiogenic Shock and Cardiac Arrest. Circ Heart Fail. 2018;11(9):e004905. doi:10.1161/CIRCHEARTFAILURE.118.004905 Tehrani BN, Truesdell AG, Psotka MA, et al. A Standardized and Comprehensive Approach to the Management of Cardiogenic Shock. JACC Hear Fail. 2020;8(11):879-891. doi:10.1016/j.jchf.2020.09.005 Grant C, Richards JB, Frakes M, Cohen J, Wilcox SR. ECMO and Right Ventricular Failure: Review of the Literature. J Intensive Care Med. 2021;36(3):352-360. doi:10.1177/0885066619900503  Debaty G, Babaz V, Durand M, et al. Prognostic factors for extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation recipients following out-of-hospital refractory cardiac arrest. A systematic review and meta-analysis. Resuscitation. 2017;112:1-10. doi:10.1016/j.resuscitation.2016.12.011 Russo JJ, Aleksova N, Pitcher I, et al. Left Ventricular Unloading During Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation in Patients With Cardiogenic Shock. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2019;73(6):654-662. doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2018.10.085 ELSO General Guidelines Extracorporeal Life Support Organization (ELSO) General Guidelines for All ECLS Cases.; 2017. www.elso.org. Accessed April 10, 2021. Su Y, Liu K, Zheng JL, Li X, Zhu DM, Zhang Y, Zhang YJ, Wang CS, Shi TT, Luo Z, Tu GW. Hemodynamic monitoring in patients with venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. Ann Transl Med. 2020 Jun;8(12):792. doi: 10.21037/atm.2020.03.186. PMID: 32647717; PMCID: PMC7333156. CardioNerds Cardiac Critical Care Production Team

The CardioNerds Cardiovascular Genomics Series continues! In this episode Dr. Dan Ambinder (CardioNerds Cofounder and Interventional Cardiologist), Dr. Anjali Wagle (FIT Ambassador at Johns Hopkins) and Dr. James Sampognaro (medicine resident at Johns Hopkins Osler Medicine Residency) learn from Dr. Allison Hays (Associate Professor of Medicine, Division of Cardiology, Johns Hopkins CMR researcher and Medical Director of Echocardiography) and Dr. Cindy James (Associate Professor of Medicine and certified genetic counselor at Johns Hopkins with research focusing on cardiovascular genetic counseling and arrhythmogenic cardiomyopathies). They discuss arrhythmogenic RV cardiomyopathy as the context to learn about genetic counseling and family screening.  Episode script and notes were developed by Dr. Anjali Wagle. Audio editing by CardioNerds Academy Intern, student doctor Chelsea Amo Tweneboah. This episode was developed in collaboration with the American Society of Preventive Cardiology and is supported with unrestricted educational funds from Illumina, Inc. All CardioNerds content is planned, produced, and reviewed solely by CardioNerds. This CardioNerds Cardiovascular Genomics series is a multi-institutional collaboration made possible by contributions of stellar fellow leads and expert faculty from several programs. Check out this REVIEW describing the “Multimodality Imaging in Arrhythmogenic Right Ventricular Cardiomyopathy” by Nitin Malik, Allison Hays, and colleagues.   For related episodes, please enjoy these case-based discussions:  Ep 56. Case Report: Arrhythmogenic Desmoplakin Cardiomyopathy – Northwestern University  Ep 74. Case Report: Arrhythmogenic Right Ventricular Cardiomyopathy (ARVC) – Summa Health  Enjoy this Circulation 2022 Paths to Discovery article to learn about the CardioNerds story, mission, and values. Pearls • Notes • References CardioNerds Cardiovascular Genomics PageCardioNerds Episode PageCardioNerds AcademyCardionerds Healy Honor Roll CardioNerds Journal ClubSubscribe to The Heartbeat Newsletter!Check out CardioNerds SWAG!Become a CardioNerds Patron! Show notes – Genetic Counseling & Family Screening in Arrhythmogenic Cardiomyopathies Notes (developed by Dr. Anjali Wagle)   What is the underlying pathophysiology of arrhythmogenic RV cardiomyopathy (ARVC)?  Fibrofatty replacement cardiac myocytes  Associated with genetically mediated disruption of desmosomal proteins   This leads to thinning and weakness of the heart that can lead to aneurysms and progressive dilatation and failure of the right ventricle (RV)  How is ARVC diagnosed?  2010 taskforce criteria (Marcus et al, 2010):    RV structural abnormalities including findings seen on echocardiogram, MRI, and RV angiography  Pathological criteria  Repolarization abnormalities   Depolarization/conduction abnormalities   Ventricular arrhythmias   Genetics and/or family history   How does ARVC present?   Young, healthy individual will have symptoms of arrhythmias (syncope, pre-syncope, SCD) or heart failure  Family screening   What are the inheritance and genetic factors of ARVC?  Autosomal dominant pattern  Low penetrance and variable expressivity   Half of patients who are index cases will be found to have a mutation in the desmosomal gene.   What are the most common mutations associated with ARVC?  Most commonly the genes involved are plakophilin-2 (PKP-2) and desmoplakin.   For PKP-2 the most common mutations are truncating mutations.   In patients who have inherited two truncating mutations, this will result in neonatal lethality.   Is there a difference in the genetic factors of left and right arrhythmogenic cardiomyopathy?   ACM is disproportionally a right dominated cardiomyopathy. Left dominated cardiomyopathy has a different genetic profile.   Pathogenic variants in desmoplakin disproportionally cause biventricular forms of ACM or left dominated forms.   What are the echocardiographic findings in ACM?  Wall thinning and aneurysmal dilation in the sub-tricuspid region, RV outflow tract, or base also known as the “triangle of dysplasia.”  Progression of disease tends to be from the base to the apex.  Why is cardiac MRI the preferred imaging modality in ACM?  Higher spatial resolution and improved visualization of the right ventricle  Can imaging help define prognosis in ACM?  Top two strongest measures of prognostic value in ACM are:  RV fractional change area < 33%  Tricuspid annular plane systolic exertion < 1.7cm   References – Genetic Counseling & Family Screening in Arrhythmogenic Cardiomyopathies Malik, N., Mukherjee, M., Wu, K. C., Zimmerman, S. L., Zhan, J., Calkins, H., James, C. A., Gilotra, N. A., Sheikh, F. H., Tandri, H., Kutty, S., & Hays, A. G. (2022). Multimodality Imaging in Arrhythmogenic Right Ventricular Cardiomyopathy. Circulation. Cardiovascular Imaging, 15(2), e013725. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCIMAGING.121.013725  Marcus FI, McKenna WJ, Duane S, Basso C, Bauce B, Bluemke DA, Calkins H, Corrado D, Cox MGPJ, Daubert JP, Fontaine G, Gear K, Hauer R, Nava A, Picard MH, Protonotarios N, Saffitz JE, Sanborn DMY, Steinberg JS, Tandri H, Thiene G, Towbin JA, Tsatsopoulou A, Wichter T, Zareba W. Diagnosis of Arrhythmogenic Right Ventricular Cardiomyopathy/Dysplasia. Circulation. 2010;121:1533–1541.