Background: Although sepsis is a known risk factor for cardiac arrhythmias, data on incidence and outcomes of atrial and ventricular arrhythmias in severe sepsis is limited. The purpose of this study is to examine the association of severe sepsis with cardiac arrhythmias and their impact on outcome in this patient population. Methods:We used hospital discharge data from the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) during the year 2012. All patients 18 years or older were included in the study. The International Classification of Diseases-Clinical Modification, 9th revision (ICD-9-CM) code was used to identify patients with discharge diagnosis of severe sepsis, atrial fibrillation (A Fib), atrial flutter (AFL), ventricular fibrillation (VF) arrest and non-ventricular fibrillation (non-VF) arrest. In order to study the association of arrhythmias with severe sepsis, two groups were defined: group a-with severe sepsis was compared to group b-without severe sepsis. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression methods were used to adjust for potential confounding factors and variables associated with cardiac arrhythmias were determined.Results: A total of 30,712,524 NIS hospital discharges (weighted for national estimate) were included in our study, of which 1,756,965 (5.7%) had severe sepsis. On multivariate analysis, after adjusting for potential confounders, severe sepsis was associated with higher risk of A Fib (OR, 1.23; 95% CI, 1.21-1.24), AFL (OR, 1.34; 95% CI, 1.30-1.40), VF arrest (OR, 2.58; 95% CI, 2.38-2.79) (OR, 3.31; 95% CI, 3.07-3.57) and non-VF arrest (OR, 4.91; 95% CI,). In the severe sepsis group, cardiac arrhythmia was associated with higher in-hospital mortality (OR, 1.41; 95% CI, 1.37-1.45), length of stay (LOS) >75% quartile (OR, 1.50; 95% CI, 1.46-1.53) and total hospital charges >75% quartile (OR, 1.37; 95% CI, 1.34-1.41). Advanced age, male sex, ischemic heart disease, diabetes mellitus (DM), congestive heart failure (CHF), valvular heart disease, respiratory failure, mechanical ventilation and use of vasopressors were independently associated with cardiac arrhythmias. Conclusions:Patients with severe sepsis are at high risk of atrial and life threatening ventricular arrhythmias. Despite adjustment for potential confounding factors, patients hospitalized with severe sepsis carry a significantly higher risk for cardiac arrest and increased mortality.

Acute ischemic stroke (AIS) and acute myocardial infarction (AMI) are both life-threatening medical conditions with narrow therapeutic time-window that carry grave prognosis if not addressed promptly. The acute management of both condition is well documented in the literature, however the management of a simultaneous presentation of both AIS and AMI is unclear. A delayed intervention of one infarcted territory for the other may result in permanent irreversible morbidity or disability, and even death. In addition, the use of antiplatelet and anticoagulants that are inherently part of an AMI management may increase the risk for hemorrhagic conversion associated with intravenous thrombolysis used in AIS, and the use of a thrombolytic in AIS increases the risk of cardiac wall rupture in the setting of an AMI.Despite this ambiguity, there is no clear evidence-based guideline or clinical studies that have addressed the optimal management of this rare co-occurrence. This review paper examines the existing literature on the management of simultaneous acute cardio-cerebral infarction (CCI) and highlights the existing challenge to management.

No abstract

Background: Patients with a left ventricular assist device (LVAD) are at a higher risk of ischemic stroke (IS) and intracranial hemorrhage (ICH). There is limited data available on risk factors and outcomes associated with IS and ICH in LVAD patients.Methods: All patients >18 years of age with an LVAD were identified based on the U.S. Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) database from the year 2007 to 2011. Patients with a discharge diagnosis of IS were compared to those without IS. In a separate analysis, patients with a discharge diagnosis of ICH were compared to patients without ICH. Trends, predictors and outcomes of IS and ICH were analyzed using a multivariate regression model. Results:Out of 17,323 discharges with a primary diagnosis of heart failure with LVAD, 624 (3.6%) patients had a co-diagnosis of IS and 387 (2.2%) had a co-diagnosis of ICH. From 2007 to 2011, the discharge diagnosis of heart failure with LVAD increased from 946 to 5,540, but the proportion of patients with IS remained about 3.4%, while the incidence of ICH decreased from 3.8% in 2007 to a plateau of around 2.2% in the following years. After adjusting for potential confounders, increasing Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) score was an independent predictor of IS and ICH. In-hospital mortality was four-fold higher in the IS group (odds ratio: 4.2; 95% CI: 2.3-7.6; P<0.0001) and 18-fold higher in the ICH group (OR: 18; 95% CI: 9-34, P<0.0001). Renal disease (OR: 5.3; CI: 1.3-22.1; P=0.02), liver disease (OR: 4.9; CI: 1.1-21.2; P=0.03) and abnormal coagulation profile (OR: 4.8; CI: 1.6-14.4; P=0.01) were independent predictors of mortality in LVAD patients with IS. Presence of diabetes mellitus (OR 4.3, P=0.1) and liver disease (or 2.8, P=0.2) showed trends towards predicting mortality in LVAD patients with ICH but did not reach statistical significance.Conclusions: Increasing comorbidity burden significantly increases the risk of both IS and ICH with LVAD. In our cohort, the incidence of IS and ICH increases the mortality 4-and 18-fold, respectively. Renal disease, liver disease and abnormal coagulation profile were independent predictors of mortality in LVAD patients with IS. Shahreyar et al. CVA in patients with LVAD

A paradoxical relationship between BMI and mortality risk is present in elderly patients with ICD at high risk of sudden death with a lower mortality in obese or overweight patients than in those with normal BMI.

No abstract

The overall mortality of morbidly obese patients after IHCA is worse than that for nonobese patients, especially if IHCA occurs after 7 days of hospitalization and survivors are more likely to be transferred to a skilled nursing facility.

Summary Diabetes mellitus is a major risk factor for arrhythmogenesis and is associated with a 2-fold increase in all-cause mortality and a 4-fold increase in cardiovascular mortality including sudden cardiac death when compared to nondiabetics. Implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICD) have been shown to effectively reduce arrhythmic death and all-cause mortality in patients with severe myocardial dysfunction. With a high competing risk of nonarrhythmic cardiac and noncardiac death, survival benefit of ICD in patients with diabetes mellitus could be reduced, but the sub-analysis of diabetic patients in randomized clinical trials provides reassurance regarding a similar beneficial survival effect of ICD and cardiac resynchronization therapy in diabetics, as observed in the overall population with advanced heart disease. In this article, the authors highlight some of the clinical issues related to diabetes, summarize the data on the efficacy of ICD in diabetics when compared to nondiabetics and discuss concerns related to ICD implantation in patients with diabetes.