Background-Data from single-center studies suggest that echocardiographic parameters of mechanical dyssynchrony may improve patient selection for cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). In a prospective, multicenter setting, the Predictors of Response to CRT (PROSPECT) study tested the performance of these parameters to predict CRT response. Methods and Results-Fifty-three centers in Europe, Hong Kong, and the United States enrolled 498 patients with standard CRT indications (New York Heart Association class III or IV heart failure, left ventricular ejection fraction Յ35%, QRS Ն130 ms, stable medical regimen). Twelve echocardiographic parameters of dyssynchrony, based on both conventional and tissue Doppler-based methods, were evaluated after site training in acquisition methods and blinded core laboratory analysis. Indicators of positive CRT response were improved clinical composite score and Ն15% reduction in left ventricular end-systolic volume at 6 months. Clinical composite score was improved in 69% of 426 patients, whereas left ventricular end-systolic volume decreased Ն15% in 56% of 286 patients with paired data. The ability of the 12 echocardiographic parameters to predict clinical composite score response varied widely, with sensitivity ranging from 6% to 74% and specificity ranging from 35% to 91%; for predicting left ventricular end-systolic volume response, sensitivity ranged from 9% to 77% and specificity from 31% to 93%. For all the parameters, the area under the receiver-operating characteristics curve for positive clinical or volume response to CRT was Յ0.62. There was large variability in the analysis of the dyssynchrony parameters. Conclusion-Given the modest sensitivity and specificity in this multicenter setting despite training and central analysis, no single echocardiographic measure of dyssynchrony may be recommended to improve patient selection for CRT beyond current guidelines. Efforts aimed at reducing variability arising from technical and interpretative factors may improve the predictive power of these echocardiographic parameters in a broad clinical setting. (Circulation. 2008;117: 2608-2616.)

Many eligible and ideal patients for thrombolytic therapy are not treated. Physicians are less likely to use thrombolytic therapy in eligible patients with characteristics associated with an increased risk of bleeding, lower-risk infarction, less certain diagnosis, less certain efficacy, or altered mental status. These findings suggest that the lack of treatment represents a clinical judgment rather than an inadvertent omission. In some cases, such as the lower use of thrombolytic therapy with older age, these judgments are not consistent with the published literature and may represent opportunities to improve care.

Background-Previous work has shown that there is a higher frequency of hospitalizations among black heart failure patients relative to white heart failure patients. We sought to determine

No abstract

Background-Admission to a hospital with a capability for cardiac procedures is associated with a higher likelihood of referral for a cardiac procedure but not with a better short-term clinical outcome. Whether there are differences in long-term mortality and resource consumption is not clear. We sought to determine whether elderly Medicare patients with acute myocardial infarction admitted to hospitals with on-site cardiac catheterization facilities have lower long-term hospital costs and better outcomes than patients admitted to hospitals without such facilities. Methods and Results-As part of the Cooperative Cardiovascular Project pilot in Connecticut, we conducted a retrospective cohort study using data from medical charts and administrative files. The study sample included 2521 patients with acute myocardial infarction covered by Medicare from 1992 to 1993. The cardiac catheterization rate was higher in the hospitals with facilities (38.6% versus 26.9%; PϽ0.001), but the revascularization rate was similar (20.5% versus 19.5%) during the initial episode of care and at 3 years (29.7% versus 29.7%). Mortality rates were similar for patients admitted to the 2 types of hospitals at 30 days (OR, 1.08; 95% CI, 0.83 to 1.42) and at 3 years (OR, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.83 to 1.26). The adjusted readmission rates were significantly lower among patients admitted to hospitals with cardiac catheterization facilities (OR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.61 to 0.94). However, the overall mean days in the hospital for the 3 years after admission was 25.9 for patients admitted to hospitals with facilities and 24.6 for the other patients (Pϭ0.234). Adjusting for baseline patient characteristics, there was no significant difference in the 3-year costs between patients admitted to the 2 types of hospitals. Conclusions-With higher rates of cardiac catheterization and lower readmission rates, patients admitted to hospitals with on-site cardiac catheterization facilities did not have significantly different hospital costs compared with patients admitted to hospitals without these facilities. There was also no significant difference in short-or long-term mortality rates.