Sanjum S. Sethi MD, MPH is an interventional cardiologist at Columbia University Medical Center with a particular interest in catheter-based treatments for pulmonary embolism and peripheral vascular disease. Dr. Sethi is a recipient of an AHA COVID-19 Rapid Response grant and is excited to participate in the AHA early career blogger program! @sanjum
hidden

Key Studies for the Peripheral Vascular Disease Specialist

Sanjum Sethi, MD, MPH

On Saturday, November 14, 2020 there was an interesting session evaluating new data that impacts the care of patients with lower extremity peripheral arterial disease.  For those of us involved in the daily care of these patients, we welcome new insights to help improve outcomes in this high risk patient population.

 

First, Dr. Mary McDermott from Northwestern University presented the LITE randomized clinical trial which compared a low versus high intensity home based walking program for lower extremity PAD patients.  While the benefits of supervised walking programs is well known from the literature (1), in practice we often have difficulty in convincing our patients to proceed even when experiencing lower extremity pain.  Only recently has CMS approved reimbursement for supervised exercise programs (1).  ‘

 

In this multicenter trial, 305 participants were randomized to low intensity exercise, high intensity exercise, and attention control groups.  All groups received weekly telephone education.  Both exercise groups consisted of exercise 5 days/week for upto 50 minutes/session with the low intensity intervention consisting of a comfortable walking pace without ischemic symptoms.  In contrast, the high intensity group exercised to maximal ischemic leg pain.  The primary outcome measure was 6 minute walk time at 12 months.  The high intensity exercise group had a statistically significant increase in the 6 minute walk time (53.9 meters) versus the low intensity (11.7 meters) and the control group (4.0 meters).  Similarly, there was improvement in the patient reported measures of walk distance based on the WIQ distance score in both the high intensity and low intensity groups.

 

These data suggest that we can prescribe high intensity exercise programs for our PAD patients and expect both objective and subjective improvement.  An especially important finding when many options for supervised walking programs are restricted during the current pandemic.

Next in the session were a pair of important substudies from the VOYAGER PAD trial (2).  First, Dr. Marc Bonaca from the University of Colorado presented an analysis evaluating the highest risk patients, those with critical limb ischemia (CLI).  This subgroup of PAD tends to have the worse outcomes both from a standpoint of cardiovascular and lower extremity disease.

VOYAGER PAD randomized 6,564 patients with symptomatic lower extremity peripheral arterial disease who were undergoing peripheral revascularization.  The patients were randomized 1:1 in a double-blind fashion to rivaroxaban 2.5 mg twice a day versus placebo.  All patients received low dose aspirin with clopidogrel at the operator’s discretion.  The main trial had a statistically significant benefit in the rivaroxaban group with a 15% relative risk reduction and 2.6% absolute risk reduction relative to control (19.9% versus 17.3%) (2).  The number needed to treat (NNT) was 39 with a number needed to harm (NNH) due to TIMI major bleeding of 125.

The critical limb ischemia patients comprised nearly a quarter of the overall population (n=1533).  Compared to the claudication patients, the CLI patients were at higher risk with more complex anatomy and a much higher baseline event rate (27% versus 17% at 3 years).  Since the CLI patients were at higher risk, the benefit was greater with ARR of 4.5% in the CLI group.  This was consistent across all subgroups and was primarily driven by less acute limb ischemia and lower extremity amputations.  The NNT was 23.

Next, Dr. Manesh Patel presented an analysis from VOYAGER PAD evaluating rivaroxaban therapy plus aspirin versus aspirin alone after endovascular revascularization (3).  Currently, we often use dual antiplatelet therapy in this population lasting anywhere from 1 month to 12 months post endovascular revascularization depending on the device used and patient risk profile.

With the results of COMPASS PAD (4) and VOYAGER PAD, it was unclear how to integrate this dose into the clinical care of patients receiving endovascular revascularization.  Therefore, this analysis has been highly anticipated to understand the best post-treatment antiplatelet/antithrombotic regimen.  About two-thirds of the patient population had endovascular revascularization versus one third in the surgical group.  Clopidogrel was used in 69% of the patients.  The endovascular patients had findings consistent with the overall trial with an absolute risk reduction of 1.7%.  However, major adverse limb events were reduced by (ARR) 2.4% with an NNT of 42.  There was an increase in TIMI major bleeding (NNT = 100), but not fatal bleeding.  Clopidogrel didn’t change the MALE outcomes.

Taken together, this data certainly informs our clinical practice for a wide variety of lower extremity PAD patients.  Dr. McDermott’s study reinforces the need for exercise therapy to improve walking distance and suggest that this can be done even in a home-based environment.  The VOYAGER PAD substudies suggest that low dose rivaroxaban is especially beneficial in the highest risk patients, those with CLI and has a role to reduce long term adverse limb events in all patients undergoing endovascular revascularization.  We should be strongly considering this therapy for those PAD patients that are at higher ischemic risk (diabetes, smoking, CLI) and do not have an excess in bleeding risk.

This is just a snapshot of some of the peripheral arterial disease-focused studies discussed at AHA Scientific Sessions 2020.  I encourage everyone to utilize the on-demand content including many of the abstract sections for even more PAD focused content.

 

References:

  1. Treat-Jacobson D, McDermott MM, Beckman JA, Burt MA, Creager MA, Ehrman JK, Gardner AW, Mays RJ, Regensteiner JG, Salisbury DL, Schorr EN, Walsh ME; American Heart Association Council on Peripheral Vascular Disease; Council on Cardiovascular and Stroke Nursing; Council on Epidemiology and Prevention; and Council on Lifestyle and Cardiometabolic Health. Implementation of Supervised Exercise Therapy for Patients With Symptomatic Peripheral Artery Disease: A Science Advisory From the American Heart Association. Circulation. 2019 Sep 24;140(13):e700-e710. PMID: 31446770.
  2. Bonaca MP, Bauersachs RM, Anand SS, Debus ES, Nehler MR, Patel MR, Fanelli F, Capell WH, Diao L, Jaeger N, Hess CN, Pap AF, Kittelson JM, Gudz I, Mátyás L, Krievins DK, Diaz R, Brodmann M, Muehlhofer E, Haskell LP, Berkowitz SD, Hiatt WR. Rivaroxaban in Peripheral Artery Disease after Revascularization. N Engl J Med. 2020 May 21;382(21):1994-2004. PMID: 32222135.
  3. Hiatt WR, Bonaca MP, Patel MR, Nehler MR, Debus ES, Anand SS, Capell WH, Brackin T, Jaeger N, Hess C, Pap AF, Berkowitz SD, Muehlhofer E, Haskell L, Brasil D, Madaric J, Sillesen H, Szalay D, Bauersachs R. Rivaroxaban and Aspirin in Peripheral Artery Disease Lower Extremity Revascularization: Impact of Concomitant Clopidogrel on Efficacy and Safety. Circulation. 2020 Nov 3. PMID: 33138628.
  4. Kaplovitch E, Eikelboom JW, Dyal L, Aboyans V, Abola MT, Verhamme P, Avezum A, Fox KAA, Berkowitz SD, Bangdiwala SI, Yusuf S, Anand SS. Rivaroxaban and Aspirin in Patients With Symptomatic Lower Extremity Peripheral Artery Disease: A Subanalysis of the COMPASS Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA Cardiol. 2020 Sep 30:e204390. PMID: 32997098.
hidden

Making the Most of Virtual AHA 2020: Keeping Focus

Sanjum Sethi, MD, MPH

COVID-19 has dramatically impacted every aspect of our lives.  We have been forced to redesign both our work and professional lives to accommodate social distancing efforts to reduce virus transmission.  Therefore, the 2020 American Heart Association (AHA) Scientific Sessions is a virtual program this year (1).  While we will miss the in-person aspects of a big scientific meeting, the virtual format has created new and exciting opportunities for data science communication.

As a virtual program, the information can be streamed directly to the participant’s office and workspaces, thereby broadening the range of potential attendees.  Attendance levels, marked by the number of participants registered, have the potential to exceed those able to attend in an in-person format.  For instance, earlier this year, the European Society of Cardiology had 116,000 attendees this year (2) versus roughly 35,000 per year in recent years (3).  The cost associated with travel can be significant, particularly for early career participants.  The time away from home and work may also be a factor for many, particularly those with young families.

However, the same benefit of saving time through diminished travel may also factor in the ability to concentrate while virtually attending the meeting.  If a participant maintains the same work and family schedule as normal, these competing commitments may actually diminish the experience as partial immersion may not allow for the same depth and breadth of attention.  Another unique quirk may be the competing commitment of another scientific meeting.  This was the dilemma that I faced today.  Having been invited to speak on COVID-19 and venous thromboembolism for the VEINS meeting (4), I created a two laptop and phone setup this morning to help me navigate both meetings (Figure 1).  This “command center” allowed me to simultaneously attend both and participate in those sessions in which I was most interested.  While this was a great way to participate, there are limitations in time and attention span.  A recent analysis of the American College of Cardiology meeting suggested that a virtual meeting format actually reduced social media engagement compared to the previous year (5).

Given the potential for wider dissemination of data, the virtual format has promised to reach a broader audience across the globe.  However, competing commitments and responsibilities may minimize this reach.  What can you do to maximize yield from this format and get the most out of AHA Scientific Sessions 2020?

  • Make time for your education
    • It will be impossible to concentrate on the conference if you continue to work a normal work schedule including clinical, research, or administrative responsibilities. Just as you would for the meeting, block time out for the virtual meeting so that you can dedicate your attention and focus appropriately
  • Plan out your sessions
    • The AHA Scientific Sessions has a fantastic web platform that allows for customization with the creation of a personalized schedule (https://eventpilotadmin.com/web/planner.php?id=AHA20). Using this tool in advance can allow a participant to plan out the sessions in which they are most interested and make sure the time is best utilized.
  • Get Engaged
    • The AHA Scientific Sessions has planned networking sessions and satellite sessions every evening between 5-8 pm CST. Take advantage of these opportunities to connect with mentors, answer questions, meet people in your council, and network with other participants
    • Follow the relevant posts on social media platforms such as Twitter (@AHAMeetings). There are social media ambassadors and virtual Co-Pilots assigned to each day (Saturday and Sunday for me).  Following these accounts can allow you to key into important sessions of interest
  • Making the Most of Virtual AHA 2020: Keeping Focus
    • One of the advantages of a virtual format is that many of the sessions are pre-recorded. This allows for playback at a later time, if necessary.  Furthermore, there is tremendous On-Demand Sessions content including many of the top oral abstracts being presented.

Above all, enjoy the convening of minds over the next few days.  The energy, innovation, and intelligence are amazing to experience.  The AHA program chairs have really created a platform to simulate the best parts of the in-person meeting in this virtual format.

Reference

  1. https://professional.heart.org/es/meetings/scientific-sessions
  2. Enrique Gallego-Colon E, Bonaventura A, Vecchié A, Cannatà A, Martin Fitzpatrick C. Cardiology on the cutting edge: updates from the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) Congress 2020 BMC Cardiovasc Disord.  2020 Oct 19;20(1):448.
  3. https://www.escardio.org/Congresses-&-Events/ESC-Congress/About-the-congress/Figures-from-ESC-Congress
  4. https://vivaphysicians.org/veins-programming
  5. Mackenzie G, Gulati M. 20: Impact of social media at the virtual scientific sessions during the COVID-19 pandemic.  Clin Cardiol. 2020 Sep;43(9):944-948

 

 

“The views, opinions and positions expressed within this blog are those of the author(s) alone and do not represent those of the American Heart Association. The accuracy, completeness and validity of any statements made within this article are not guaranteed. We accept no liability for any errors, omissions or representations. The copyright of this content belongs to the author and any liability with regards to infringement of intellectual property rights remains with them. The Early Career Voice blog is not intended to provide medical advice or treatment. Only your healthcare provider can provide that. The American Heart Association recommends that you consult your healthcare provider regarding your personal health matters. If you think you are having a heart attack, stroke or another emergency, please call 911 immediately.”