hidden

What will training look like in the post-pandemic era?

I remember my first week of internship very clearly – I was a part of my first code blue as a physician. Later that week, I had to have a goals of care discussion with a patient who had been in the hospital for 3 weeks (longer than I had been a doctor at that point). These were new experiences that I was eager for, but I was fortunate to have my routine that maintained a sense of normalcy for me, very much like naptime to my toddler. I was diligent in pre-rounding and seeing all my patients before my attending showed up, and would have formed a plan for their care before 8 AM.

Once the COVID-19 pandemic was in full swing here in the US, a lot of these things that were part of my routine as an intern suddenly went to the wayside. At my institution, interns were instructed not to pre-round on patients such as to minimize contact and potential infection transmission. Family meetings could only be conducted via telephone, or in some cases, video conference. Code blues were no longer a mad dash to the patient’s room, but rather, different hospital wards had different teams, such that a provider taking care of COVID+ patients does not go to a code blue for non-COVID patients and vice versa.

Rounding on these revamped inpatient teams has been…interesting to say the least. I can’t tell you the amount of times I or an attending will ask the patient a question about the patient and the response is “I don’t know, I haven’t seen them.” It’s great that interns are more comfortable admitting they don’t know something rather than lie about it, but at the same time, I can’t help but feel a sense of lack of ownership on their behalf.

Everybody will tell you that intern year sucks, and it’s rough, and they would hate to go back and do it again. But many people will also admit that they are impressed with how much they have learned and managed to push themselves beyond their perceived level of comfort during that time frame. I didn’t particularly enjoy coming to the hospital early each day I was on an inpatient service just to see my patients and review their charts, or going to the patient’s room for the umpteenth time in a day, but there have been a number of times where something meaningful was gleaned, and my ability to think critically and manage patients independently grew a little that day.

The thing that bothers me the most about these precautions is the huge change to goals of care discussions and family meetings. The logic behind it – minimizing spread of infection and exposures – makes sense and I agree with it completely. But it’s hard to develop good rapport with an individual only over the phone, and similarly, it’s difficult to comfort another human being digitally. There’s something about the physical presence of another person, the eye contact, and even the slightest gestures, that can help make the worst day of someone’s life a little less painful.

It’s quite fortunate that these protocol changes came more than halfway through the academic year, when interns at least have a handle on what things to look out for and have developed their own sense of alarm from glancing at the chart. I can’t imagine starting intern year where I only physically interact with “my” patients during rounds with my attending, or via telephone, unless there is some kind of emergency.

On the other hand, this is accelerating our embrace of telemedicine on the outpatient side, which is good for both patients and providers in many cases, and from my anecdotal experience, has resulted in a lot fewer “no-shows.” Interns are afforded more sleep, and arguably learning to pay more attention to vital signs changes and lab value changes – or at least they’re getting a better sense of when they should actually get up and go see the patient (sometimes at the urging of their senior 😊). This could simply be an inevitable step in the evolution of medical education that was accelerated by the pandemic, but I can’t say I feel that all these changes should be here to stay.

Whether it was fumbling through morning rounds and trying to formulate a new plan based on overnight events, or developing my emotional intelligence and flexing that empathy muscle, these were formative experiences for me during my intern year that have significantly contributed to my development as a clinician. These could just be the ramblings of a dinosaur, much akin to the older physicians talking about their paper charts, fibrinolytics and 48 hour calls, but I do hope some of these changes can be undone soon, for the sake of our trainees as well as our patients and their families.

“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.”

hidden

The COVID-19 Pandemic: A Master Class in Health Inequity

In my course, Social and Economic Determinants of Health Disparities, we spend the semester discussing the complex web of factors rooted in social and economic policies that propagate disparities in health. These include education, employment, housing, broader neighborhood structures and, of course, healthcare. We also contextualize individual and interpersonal health behaviors within those structures. When news of the virus really gained steam in mainstream media, one of my students commented that this was an “inverse disparity”—that predominantly rich, white people who’d vacationed in far-off places were affected. I assured him that as data by race and ethnicity surfaced, we would find minorities bearing the brunt of the burden. Unfortunately, as data began to roll in state-by-state, my prediction was accurate. Further, I knew that this was bigger than who was or wasn’t wearing a mask in public, or of the disproportionate number of minorities with pre-existing conditions that may place them at higher risk. It is about a system that consistently favors the physical, mental, emotional, and financial health of certain sects of the population over others.

When the novel coronavirus came to the US public’s attention just months ago, very few of us expected that our lives would change as much as it has in subsequent months. There were so many uncertainties with this unique virus—its transmission, incubation period, symptoms, and appropriate treatment—that we were left whirling in unpreparedness. US culture, built on the foundational value of individual freedom, found itself at odds with the need to protect a more social interest: stopping the spread.

Our best defensive effort was to stay away from each other, or social distancing—a solution (with all of its benefits) that is fundamentally steeped in privilege. It didn’t account for an invisible, operational background of millions of people who occupy the less educated, often undervalued workforce who, ironically, have come to be regarded as “essential”. There are people who must travel on crowded buses to work elbow-to-elbow in order to feed us, sanitize spaces that we might encounter, and help maintain a semblance of normalcy. While some of those workers may view their efforts as an act of service, there is undoubtedly some life or death decision-making happening. On the one hand, they face the risk of exposure to a potentially deadly virus. On the other hand, they face the equally compelling risk of not being paid if they choose not to show up to work, or if they fall ill. For many, there is really no choice at all: the financial strain posed by the latter and its negative effects on their families is non-negotiable. So, they put themselves in harm’s way, hoping against hope that they won’t contract the virus and/or bring it home to their loved ones.

Although we’re “in this together,” we have left many of the most vulnerable to fend for themselves. They live in food deserts and now have even fewer options at their disposal than before, as those with disposable income and time stocked up on supplies. They are disconnected from accurate, timely information, which is even more important as we learn new lessons about the virus daily. For some, their experience with this pandemic can best be described as “inconvenienced,” while others don the armor of homemade masks to preserve their (and our) lives.

My students are learning the same lessons many are starting to awaken to: when systems fail, the marginalized become more marginalized. The pandemic operationalizes the very definition of “disparities” that we discussed during the first lecture. We are all seeing that “differences rooted in social disadvantages that further expose individuals to additional disadvantage” mean that those who are the least equipped with the resources to withstand a pandemic are placed at higher risk of exposure, unable to effectively employ best-practices for protection against an unpredictable virus. The novel coronavirus has set the stage for a master class in health inequity and demands that we pay attention to the socially and racially stratified patterns emerging from the COVID-19 pandemic.  Luckily, experts have provided a game plan for helping the most vulnerable. Hopefully, this experience will build our empathy towards the overlooked among us as we tackle health inequity together.

Class is in session.

“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.”

hidden

COVID -19 and the clotting conundrum

Initially known as a predominantly respiratory disease, there is currently no doubt that COVID-19 is increasingly emerging as a prothrombotic condition. Observational studies, as well as published and anecdotal case reports have highlighted the thrombotic manifestations of COVID-19, with particular emphasis on the strong association between D-dimer levels and poor prognosis.1,2 While the COVID-19 clotting narrative has been dominated by venous thromboembolism (VTE) and pulmonary embolism (PE),3-5 macro-thrombosis of the coronary6 and cerebral circulations7 have also been reported, as have the prevalence of microthrombi arising from endotheliitis in other sites.8

The pathophysiology

Some authors have described this SARS-CoV-2 induced hypercoagulability as ‘thromboinflammation’, an interplay between inflammation and coagulability leading to sepsis-induced-coagulopathy (SIC) and disseminated intravascular coagulopathy in severe COVID-19 cases.9 The pathophysiology is still incompletely understood but may be largely explained by the three components of Virchow’s triad:

Endothelial dysfunction: SARS-CoV-2 virus enters the host using the angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) receptor, which is widely expressed not only in the alveolar epithelium of the lungs but also vascular endothelial cells, which traverse multiple organs.8 Varga, et al. reported this concept of COVID-19 ‘endotheliitis’ in their paper, explaining how endothelial dysfunction, which is a principal determinant of microvascular dysfunction, shifts the vascular equilibrium towards vasoconstriction, organ ischaemia, inflammation, tissue oedema, and a procoagulant state, leading to clinical sequalae in different vascular beds.8 Complement-mediated endothelial injury leading to hypercoagulability has also been suggested.10

Hypercoagulability: SARS-CoV-2-induced hypercoagulability has also been attributed as a consequence of the ‘cytokine storm’ that precipitates the onset of a systemic inflammatory response syndrome, resulting in the activation of the coagulation cascade.11,12 However, whether the coagulation cascade is directly activated by the virus or whether this is the result of local or systemic inflammation is not completely understood.12

Stasis: Critically ill hospitalized patients, irrespective of pathophysiology are prone to vascular stasis as a result of immobilization.13

Currently available data: predominantly observational studies

In some of the earliest data emerging from Wuhan, Tang, et al. reported significantly higher markers of coagulation, especially prothrombin time, D-dimers and FDP levels, among non-survivors compared to survivors of SARS-COV2 novel coronavirus pneumonia (NCP), suggesting a common coagulation activation in these patients.1

Subsequently, Zhou, et al., reported that D-dimer levels, along with high-sensitivity cardiac troponin I and IL-6 were clearly elevated in non-survivors compared with .14 This was highlighted in one of the earliest CCC-ACC webinars on COVID-19 in March 2020, by Professor Cao, who drew emphasis on their data where D-Dimer >1μg/mL was an independent risk factor for in-hospital death, with an odds ratio of 18.42 (p=0.0033). 14,15

In another single centre study among 81 severe NCP patients from Wuhan, Ciu, et al., observed that D-dimer levels >1.5 μg/mL had a sensitivity of 85% and specificity of 88.5% for detecting VTE events.3 In an observational study of 343 eligible patients by Zhang, et al., the optimum cutoff value of D-dimer level on admission to predict in-hospital mortality was 2.0 µg/ml with a sensitivity of 92.3% and a specificity of 83.3%.16

With a shift in the epicenter of the pandemic, data from Europe highlighted the prevalence of both arterial and venous thrombotic manifestations among hospitalized COVID-19 patients, many of whom received at least standard doses of thromboprophylaxis.5,13

Most recent data from an observational cohort of 2,773 hospitalized COVID-19 patients in New York, showed that in-hospital mortality was 22.5% with anticoagulation and 22.8% without anticoagulation (median survival, 14 days vs 21 days).17 Confounded by the immortal time bias, among others, these data underscore the pressing need for well-designed RCT’s to answer this burgeoning therapeutic dilemma.

Antithrombotic therapy: What is the guidance?

As physicians learn more about this clotting conundrum, there is an increasing need for evidence-based guidance in treatment protocols, especially pertaining to anticoagulation dosing and the role of D-dimers in deciding on optimum therapeutics.

International consensus-based recommendations published by Bikdeli, et al. in the Journal of American College of Cardiology on 15th April 2020 recommend risk stratification for hospitalized COVID-19 patients for VTE prophylaxis, with high index of suspicion.11 They further state that, as elevated D-dimer levels are a common finding in patients with COVID-19, it does not currently warrant routine investigation for acute VTE in absence of clinical manifestations or supporting information. For outpatients with mild COVID-19, increased mobility is encouraged with recommendations against the indiscriminate use of VTE prophylaxis, unless stratified as elevated-risk VTE.

The majority of panel members considered prophylactic anticoagulation to be reasonable for hospitalized patients of moderate to severe COVID-19 without DIC, acknowledging that there is insufficient data to consider therapeutic or intermediate dose anticoagulation; the optimal dosing however, remains unknown.11 Furthermore, extended prophylaxis, with low-molecular weight heparin or direct oral anticoagulants for up to 45 days after hospital discharge, was considered reasonable for patients with low-bleeding-risk patients and elevated VTE (i.e. reduced mobility, comorbidities and, according to some members, elevated D-dimer more than twice the upper normal ).11

A Dutch consensus published shortly after on the 23rd April 2020, also recommends prophylactic anticoagulation for all hospitalized patients, irrespective of risk scores.12 Imaging for VTE and therapeutic anticoagulation recommendations are largely guided by admission D-dimer levels and their progressive increase, based on serial testing during hospital stay, in addition to clinical suspicion. A lower threshold for imaging has been recommended if D-dimer levels increase progressively (>2,000-4,000 μg/L), particularly in presence of clinically-relevant hypercoagulability. However, in contrast to the consensus document published in JACC, the Dutch guidance recommends that, where imaging is not feasible, therapeutic-dose LMWH without imaging may be considered  if D-dimer levels increase progressively (>2,000-4,000 μg/L), in settings suggestive of clinically relevant hypercoagulability and acceptable bleeding risk.12

The need for RCT’s

Even as we scramble to clarify the pathophysiology, the urgency to establish evidence-based standard of care in terms of anticoagulation has never been greater. Dosing is a matter of hot debate (prophylactic versus intermediate versus therapeutic), especially considering the risk of bleeding that can arise from indiscriminate anticoagulation.

Furthermore, while we have data that underscores increased coagulation activity (D-dimers in particular) as a potential risk marker of poor prognosis, D-dimers remain non-specific and there is insufficient evidence as to whether they can be used to guide decision-making on optimum anticoagulation doses among patients with COVID-19.

The existing evidence on thrombotic complications and their treatment has been primarily derived from non-randomized, relatively small and retrospective analyses. Such observational studies have been hypothesis generating at best, and in the absence of robust evidence, randomized clinical trials are imperative to address this critical gap in knowledge in an area of clinical equipoise. And there are quite a few to watch out for, as evidenced by a quick search in Clinicaltrials.gov, some of which are already recruiting.

RCT’s of therapeutic vs prophylactic anticoagulation:

Currently recruiting at University Hospital, Geneva, this trial randomizes 200 hospitalized adults with severe COVID-19 to therapeutic anticoagulation versus thromboprophylaxis during hospital stay. The primary endpoint is a composite outcome of arterial or venous thrombosis, DIC and all-cause mortality at 30 days.

This open label RCT of hospitalized COVID-19 positive patients with a D-dimer >500 ng/ml is currently recruiting at NYU Langone Health (estimated enrolment of 1000 patients). Patients will be randomized to higher-dose versus lower-dose (e.g. prophylactic-dose) anticoagulation in 1:1 ratio. Primary endpoints include incidences of cardiac arrest, DVT, PE, MI, arterial thromboembolism or hemodynamic shock at 21 days and all-cause mortality at 1 year.

This randomized, open-label trial sponsored by Massachusetts General Hospital (MGH) commencing recruitment mid-May, will randomize 300 participants with elevated D-dimer > 1500 ng/ml to therapeutic versus standard of care anticoagulation in a 1:1 ratio, based on MGH COVID-19 Treatment Guidance. Designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of anticoagulation, primary outcome measures include the composite efficacy endpoint of death, cardiac arrest, symptomatic DVT, PE, arterial thromboembolism, MI, or hemodynamic shock at 12 weeks, as well as a major bleeding event at 12 weeks.

  • Enoxaparin for Thromboprophylaxis in Hospitalized COVID-19 Patients: Comparison of 40 mg o.d. Versus 40 mg b.i.d. A Randomized Clinical Trial (X-COVID 19)[https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04366960]

This open-label multi-centre RCT will recruit 2712 hospitalized COVID-19 patients in Milan, Italy, randomized to subcutaneous enoxaparin 40 mg daily versus twice daily within 12 hours after hospitalization, to assess the primary outcome measure of venous thromboembolism detected by imaging at 30 days.

 RCT of intermediate vs prophylactic dose anticoagulation:

A cluster-randomized trial of 100 participants, IMPROVE-COVID, sponsored by Columbia University will compare the efficacy of intermediate versus prophylactic doses of anticoagulation in critically ill patients with COVID-19. The primary outcome measure is the composite of being alive and without clinically-relevant venous or arterial thrombotic events at discharge from ICU or at 30 days (if ICU duration ≥30 days).

Even months later, COVID-19 continues to baffle clinicians. But what has been crystal clear right from the outset is that there is no alternative to evidence-based practice, and it stands true in the face of this clotting conundrum as well.

Image from Shutterstock

References

  1. Tang N, Li D, Wang X, Sun Z. Abnormal coagulation parameters are associated with poor prognosis in patients with novel coronavirus pneumonia. J Thromb Haemost. 2020;18(4):844-847.
  2. Zhang L, Yan X, Fan Q, Liu H, Liu X, Liu Z, et al. D-dimer levels on admission to predict in-hospital mortality in patients with Covid-19. J Thromb Haemost. 2020 Apr 19. doi: 10.1111/jth.14859.
  3. Cui S, Chen S, Li X, Liu S, Wang F: Prevalence of venous thromboembolism in patients with severe novel coronavirus pneumonia.. J Thromb Haemost. 2020 Apr 9. doi: 10.1111/jth.14830
  4. Poissy J, Goutay J, Caplan M, Parmentier E, Duburcq T, Lassalle F, et al. Pulmonary Embolism in COVID-19 Patients: Awareness of an Increased Prevalence. Circulation. 2020 Apr 24. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.120.047430.
  5. Lodigiani C, Iapichino G, Carenzo L, Cecconi M Ferrazzi P, Sebastian T, et al., on behalf of the Humanitas COVID-19 Task Force. Venous and arterial thromboembolic complications in COVID-19 patients admitted to an academic hospital in Milan, Italy. Thromb Res. 2020; 191: 9–14.
  6. Dominguez-Erquicia P, Dobarro D, Raposeiras-Roubín S, Bastos-Fernandez G, Iñiguez-Romo A. Multivessel coronary thrombosis in a patient with COVID-19 pneumonia, European Heart Journal, , ehaa393, https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehaa393
  7. Oxley TJ, Mocco J, Majidi S, Kellner CP, Shoirah H, Singh IP, et al. Large-Vessel Stroke as a Presenting Feature of Covid-19 in the Young. N Engl J Med. 2020 Apr 28.
  8. Varga Z, Flammer AJ, Steiger P, Haberecker M, Andermatt R, Zinkernagel AS, et al. Endothelial cell infection and endotheliitis in COVID-19. Lancet. 2020 May 2;395(10234):1417-1418
  9. Connors JM, Levy JH. Thromboinflammation and the hypercoagulability of COVID-19. J Thromb Haemost. 2020 Apr 17. doi: 10.1111/jth.14849.
  10. Magro C, Mulvey JJ, Berlin D, Nuovo G, Salvatore S, Harp J, Baxter-Stoltzfus A, et al. Complement associated microvascular injury and thrombosis in the pathogenesis of severe COVID-19 infection: a report of five cases [published online ahead of print, 2020 Apr 15]. Transl Res. 2020;S1931-5244(20)30070-0. doi:10.1016/j.trsl.2020.04.007
  11. Bikdeli B, Madhavan MV, Jimenez D, Chuich T, Dreyfus I, Driggin E, et al. COVID-19 and Thrombotic or Thromboembolic Disease: Implications for Prevention, Antithrombotic Therapy, and Follow-up. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2020 Apr 15:S0735-1097(20)35008-7
  12. Oudkerk M, Büller HR, Kuijpers D, van Es N, Oudkerk SF, McLoud TC, et al. Diagnosis, Prevention, and Treatment of Thromboembolic Complications in COVID-19: Report of the National Institute for Public Health of the Netherlands. Radiology. 2020 Apr 23:201629.
  13. Klok FA, Kruip MJHA, van der Meer NJM, Arbous MS, Gommers DAMPJ, Kant KM, et al. Incidence of thrombotic complications in critically ill ICU patients with COVID-19. Thromb Res. 2020 Apr 10. pii: S0049-3848(20)30120-1. doi: 10.1016/j.thromres.2020.04.013.
  14. Zhou F, Yu T, Du R, Fan G, Liu Y, Liu Z, et al.Clinical course and risk factors for mortality of adult inpatients with COVID-19 in Wuhan, China: a retrospective cohort study. Lancet. 2020 Mar 28;395(10229):1054-1062.
  15. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CjEhV68GcD8&feature=youtu.be
  16. Zhang L, Yan X, Fan Q, Liu H, Liu X, Liu Z, Zhang Z. D-dimer levels on admission to predict in-hospital mortality in patients with Covid-19. J Thromb Haemost. 2020 Apr 19. doi: 10.1111/jth.14859. [Epub ahead of print]
  17. Paranjpe I, Fuster V, Lala A, Russak A, Glicksberg BS, Levin MA, et al. Association of Treatment Dose Anticoagulation with In-Hospital Survival Among Hospitalized Patients with COVID-19 [published online ahead of print, 2020 May 6]. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2020;doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2020.05.001

“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.”

hidden

Innovations in 3-D and 4-D Technology in the Cath Lab

There have been tremendous advances in 3-dimensional (3-D) technologies in the past few years, not only in various medical and surgical fields but also in our daily lives outside of work; with more and more new features in cell phones, computer design programs, and movies!!  4-dimensional (4-D) imaging captures 3-D images over time. These technologies are particularly important in cardiology, especially in interventional cardiology. The heart is a very dynamic organ, and understanding the variation in the anatomy of vessels and geometry of cardiac structures is key to ensuring successful procedures, patient’s safety and good outcomes. More recently, newer innovations in both 3-D and 4-D technologies have been developed, so I decided to shed light on some of these innovations and how they can be potential game-changers in the cath lab.

  • 3-D Holograms

This technology was actually displayed at the Transcatheter Cardiovascular Therapeutics (TCT) 2019 meeting. It converts live transesophageal echo (TEE) imaging into real-time 3-D holographic video in the cath lab to aid structural heart procedures.  The 3-D hologram is projected on a special display screen, and the interventional cardiologist uses hand movements and a foot pedal/switch to change the image orientation without breaking the sterile field. It also allows the operator to see the tools they use in the cath lab, including catheters or devices, in real-time in a 3-D format. This technology does not even require the user to wear 3-D glasses! It was submitted for FDA regulatory review in September 2019.

  • HeartFlow Planner

This is a noninvasive, real-time virtual tool for coronary artery disease intervention. It allows interventional cardiologists to virtually map vessels on a 3-D coronary tree, with color codes indicating the fractional flow reserve-computed tomography (FFR-CT) values for each vessel as measured by a computational fluid dynamics algorithm. This seems to be a good tool for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) planning in vessels with significant disease; as it aims to provide us with a non-invasive way to determine whether a stenotic lesion if potentially flow limiting. However, it is important to note the CT-FFR has its own limitations, and some patients might still need invasive FFR for accurate assessment. This tool was approved by the FDA in September 2019.

Figure 1: 3-D CT-FFR coronary tree showing both flow limiting and non-flow limiting lesions [from reference 1].

  • 3-D Printing

3-D printing has been used in the surgical fields for more than a decade. It refers to making complex 3-D objects from computer-aided designs. This technology has been increasingly utilized in structural heart procedures in the past few years, where these 3-D models can be printed from a patient’s CT, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), or 3-D ultrasound images (Figure 1). These 3-D printed structures not only help with procedural planning and device sizing but also allow operators to practice dry runs and perform pre-procedural navigation.

Figure 2: Image of a 3-D printed model which shows cardiac valves and major vessels with their geometric locations relative to each other (reference 3).

  • 4-D Imaging

4-D imaging adds an important component to 3-D imaging, which is the change of these 3-D images over time. 4-D flow images include the direction of blood flow, blood velocities and shear wall stress [2] (Figure 3). This is particularly important in coronary interventions, structural heart procedures and different congenital abnormalities where identification of blood flow in the 4-D view is useful, especially when the anatomy is complex. These changes in position over time help guide our procedures, not only to ensure successful outcomes but also to avoid potential complications. These 4-D images require large amounts of data, but they can be obtained from either cardiac MRI or computational fluid dynamics, which is a specialized area of mathematics and fluid mechanics in engineering [2]. 4-D imaging is still in its early phases, but it is another exciting advancement in our field.

Figure 3: Representation of an MRI-generated 4-D flow image showing blood flow through the aorta and major vessels (reference 4).

In conclusion, we have seen and continue to see tremendous advances in the innovations of 3-D and 4-D imaging with important implications in our work in the cath lab. With our continued collaboration with informational technology experts, engineers, and scientists, these innovations are potentially game-changers in different fields, including coronary interventions and structural heart procedures. I look forward to seeing how this technology continues to evolve in the coming decades!!

References:

  • Fornell, Dave “Overview of the top news and new technologies at the 2019 Transcatheter Cardiovascular Therapeutics meeting”, November 2019,

https://www.dicardiology.com/article/6-hot-topics-interventional-cardiology-tct-2019

https://www.itnonline.com/content/arterys-showcases-fda-cleared-4d-flow-mri-software-rsna-2016

“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.”

hidden

Wellness Amid a Pandemic

I think about wellness often and the unique aspects of being a physician that make preserving our wellbeing even more important. Of course, this COVID-19 pandemic has tested all of us and the things we turn to for wellness and our escape from medicine, may not be available to us right now. After work dinner and drinks, early morning group fitness classes, and young professional networking events have been replaced by Netlfix© and dine-in, home workouts, and Zoom “wine” downs. We all had to dig down deep inside to find new venues for wellness and if we were lucky, our institutions provided resources to help us during this crazy time. What this pandemic taught me was that there are things I still needed to work on to build my resilience even further- and I am totally okay with that. Working on ourselves to better ourselves should be a continuous goal- everyone has room for improvement.

As a single woman living in the city, my nights and weekends were always filled with social events. I felt very isolated and realized how much of my free time was being occupied by my friends and the events I attended as part of my wellness routines. I miss my morning classes at bootcamp and will never complain again when my alarm wakes me up at 4:25am to get to class- whenever that may be. Some of the things that have helped me are FaceTime and Houseparty dates with friends and family, walking outside on the few sunny days Boston has graced us with, trying to eat healthy when I can, in-home workouts which I am not a fan of to be completely honest, but most important, was being vulnerable with friends, family, colleagues, and even patients who asked how I was doing during our virtual visits. I met with a Wellness Coach provided through my institution and the lightbulb moment for me was when he reminded me to be kind to myself. I remember seeing posts all over social media about how we should be building businesses, getting in shape, writing grants, or checking off any other number of “goals” because we have “so much time” and feeling bad, but I got over that. In the middle of this crisis, all our lives have been disrupted, some much more so than others, and we are all doing the absolute best we can. I remind myself to be grateful and I started writing specific things down that I am grateful for each day.

May is Mental Health Awareness Month and as physicians, we shy away from talking about such things. It may be that we are supposed to be superheroes who are invincible, or it may be that if we did seek help and received a diagnosis we would have to declare it on some medical state licensing applications, or we may just be afraid. Mental health is one of the many aspects of overall wellbeing and there are many ways to reach out for help for those who need it. COVID-19 has had many casualties and we must guard our mental health during this pandemic. Find what works for you and do it. Reach out when you need to and remember that it is totally okay to not be okay. Protect your mind, body, and soul as these are key aspects of our overall wellbeing. I feel optimistic about our future. When we come out on the other side of this let us take all the lessons we learned and remember to never take things such as human contact for granted again.

Stay safe and stay healthy.

“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.”

hidden

COVID-19 Stage 2: Embracing Progress, Cautiously.

In these early days of May 2020, it seems like “change is in the air”. In the northern parts of this planet (myself based in Canada’s capital), winters’ cold, icy grip has thawed, and signs of nature and life are starting to be spotted everywhere. Of course, no mention of the year 2020 is complete without placing the Covid-19 pandemic in its proper context within the topic discussed. I’ve been seeing a lot of articles and discussions online that too easily link the “spring is upon us” and “life is getting back to its normal rhythm” ethos with the recent positive stories about Covid-19 infections. Reports of daily hospital admittance and mortality rates dropping are signs of progress indeed, specifically in nation states that were hit early and hard by the disease at the start of the year, and in the ensuing first few months.

While this is welcome and encouraging news, I can’t shake the feeling that people are either consciously or subconsciously paralleling the arrival of seasonal change, an end of the typical academic school year, and the learned attitudes of past years, onto what this 2020 calendar year will be like, moving forward from this stage. Undoubtedly, overall status of the Covid-19 pandemic is now changing, with factors like spread rate seemingly decreasing (in spots), knowledge about the virus increasing (everywhere), and local and national healthcare systems all working and adjusting to better handle the situation (with some exceptions). This, in addition to coordinated social, governmental and economical efforts, working in concert to prevent a much worse outcome from unfolding, all indicate advancement and positive aspects of where we stand at the moment, in early May of 2020.

                                                      (Image from pixabay.com CC-0)

However, and you knew I was going to bring up the “however” adverb! Equating what normally is the care-free, and bright-sunshine attitude of previous years to where we are this year, at this stage in the pandemic, is simply not appropriate and could be dangerous. There are still many unknowns about how SARS-CoV-2 may change with the seasonal transitions, not just within the northern hemisphere where we are coming out of winter and into spring and warmer weather, but also minding how will the seasonal changes affect the southern hemisphere, where the temperature changes go from warmer to cooler at this time of year. There are also questions remaining about how different cities and nations are implementing the various step-wise stages of coming out of the strict physical distancing parameters, which helped limit the size of the surge of infection. Will certain districts and cities experience a second wave of infectious spread? Will citizens be able and willing to go back into physical distancing status if needed? Those and many other questions are still left unanswered presently, and it’s too difficult to forecast with the limited data we have at this stage, in early May of 2020.

Having said that, I still want to bring back the sense of positive momentum we are presently experiencing. From a bird’s eye view point: We the people of this planet, united, are more informed, have a better handle over, and are able to deal with the Covid-19 crisis today much better than we were a couple of months ago. Together we can and will progress into the desired advantageous state of preparedness and better reaction to SARS-CoV-2 infection, and resulting disease, this is a fact. We just need to continue to investigate, learn, and plan appropriate steps to take, so that we can all safely reduce the dangers that still are posed by the virus, and take note and find ways to reduce the pain and loss that our communities have experienced so far, and moving forward. Only through those careful steps, and planning ahead, would we really feel like “spring is in the air”, and not a minute before then! Be safe, stay healthy, and care for one another.

“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.”

hidden

The Importance of Maintaining the Public’s Trust in Science and Medicine

Often, and especially during the COVID-19 pandemic, there is a plethora of misinformation that is spread. We have all probably seen at least one scientific publication, news article, social media post, or YouTube video that is spreading information that is not accurate. Every day, I am bombarded by conspiracy theories or unfounded scientific claims while skimming through social media. During a time when information is rapidly disseminated through the internet, it is often difficult to extinguish a lie.

Sometimes, misinformation is inadvertently spread by well-meaning individuals who have not had the time or energy to confirm or critically appraise the information shared. “Liking”, “retweeting”, and/or sharing a post from a colleague/friend/relative is facile. We have all probably “retweeted” or shared certain articles and posts that we did not completely critically assess before sharing. Sometimes dissecting truth from fallacy is difficult, especially when information is disseminated widely. Our current technological advances with the internet and social media magnify opinions, good and bad. Occasionally, one may think, if multiple people I know and/or respect are sharing certain information and the number of posts about the false information outnumber those on the truth, then the misinformation must be true.

Occasionally, misinformation about science or medicine is shared by members of our own scientific and/or medical communities, which can sometimes be more damaging to our profession. For example, more assumed credibility may be given to a scientist or healthcare provider, even if his/her expertise is not in the area that is commented on. Conspiracy theorists may continually reference these “experts” to support their arguments. Sometimes, refuting incorrect information requires massive efforts but may never eliminate the long-lasting negative effects of the misinformation. For example, Andrew Wakefield’s infamous, now retracted scientific article that was published in The Lancet and falsely claimed an association between the measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine with autism is unfortunately still being referenced to support arguments against vaccinations even though multiple studies have overwhelmingly refuted the claims made in the retracted article.

With less malicious intent, some misinformation may be spread by the media or others in reference to research articles. Certain conclusions of research papers are sometimes not justified by the data presented due to inadequate sample size, biases, issues with the experimental design, etc. During a pandemic, since rapid dissemination of scientific and medical information is needed, there is frequently a tradeoff with the scientific rigor and reproducibility of the results. Since access to papers in preprint servers are available to the public, the media and public figures may tout certain research findings as truth when they have not been vetted by the peer-review process. A fellow AHA early career blogger, Dr. Allison Webel (@allisonwebelPhD), recently wrote an outstanding blog discussing the importance of the peer-review process (https://earlycareervoice.professional.heart.org/in-defense-of-peer-review/). Of note, even peer-reviewed articles are not free from research misconduct and incorrect conclusions. There are many articles retracted from high impact journals. Before the development of the internet and social media, critiques and feedback of research findings were typically only discussed at scientific meetings or at other selective venues (e.g., local conferences/presentations, journals typically not viewed by lay people, etc.). Now, these debates occur in the public arena with beneficial and negative aspects and frequently with nonexperts. These public debates may dilute the truth when unfounded comments are perpetuated.

What should we do about the spread of misinformation? Propaganda and false information are always going to be spread but we should try to mitigate their breadth and potential damage. On an individual level, researchers should thoroughly assess their results and determine whether their data are valid and whether the claims they make in publications are justified by the data before presenting the findings to the public. Limit overreaching conclusions. Scrutiny of results by authors and the research community is essential to the scientific process. Developments and advances in science often occur when findings are reproduced either within a specific lab/group or by other labs/groups and this is especially important to realize during a time when a deluge of single-center, small sample size papers are published about the COVID-19 pandemic. Dr. Elizabeth Knight (@TheKnightNurse), another fellow AHA early career blogger, recently calls to attention the scientific lessons learned from the current pandemic (https://earlycareervoice.professional.heart.org/evidence-whats-good-whats-good-enough-whats-dangerous-lessons-for-now-and-later/).

How do we influence other people’s opinions? Internal changes are often easier to make than changing other people’s opinions. However, we are all likely an influential source of information within our own social circles and networks. We may feel more comfortable directly communicating with people we know to correct misinformation. Altering the opinions of people who we do not personally know is more challenging. At minimum, as researchers and healthcare providers, we should not intentionally try to deceive the public. Flagrant dishonesty from researchers and/or healthcare providers may erode the public’s trust in our profession, possibly to a greater extent than a nonexpert’s comments. We all make mistakes and honest misunderstandings and misinterpretations can affect all of us. However, deliberately lying and abusing the influence of one’s position as a scientist or healthcare professional is more offensive. I do not know how best to address colleagues who blatantly mislead the public. If an individual we personally know is deceiving others, we can directly communicate with him/her about the impact of the misinformation. Depending on the extent of the damage created by an individual in our professional community who is propagating false information, should we review his/her ability to maintain as a member of our profession?

What are your thoughts on how we can preserve the public’s trust in science and medicine?

“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.”

hidden

A new and evolving health struggle for Heart failure patients: COVID-19

It’s safe to say we are not living in normal times.  This is Heart Failure (HF) in the time of the coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19). Patients with COVID-19 and preexisting cardiovascular disease (CVD) are at an increased risk of severe disease and death. Moreover, infection has also been associated with cardiac injury such as acute myocardial infarction (AMI), myocarditis, and stress-induced cardiomyopathy leading to subsequent cardiogenic shock (CS) requiring advanced heart failure therapies. There is a bidirectional relationship between viral upper respiratory traction infection(URI) and worsening HF with an increase in hospital re-admission rate as previously noted with influenza. Patients with HF are especially susceptible to influenza-related complications, including acute decompensated HF and secondary pneumonia. Furthermore, HF is associated with greater in-hospital mortality and adverse clinical outcomes. With around 1 million confirmed COVID-19 cases and counting in the US, one would expect an increase in heart failure admissions. Over the past several weeks as the number of COVID-19 admissions increase, the number of patients admitted with heart failure admissions have been at their lowest, which raises the following question: Where are all the HF patients?

We can speculate that people are terrified at home so they are not showing up to the emergency departments. Patients could be slowly accumulating fluids and getting into a decompensated state. On the other hand, being less active, they could also have been experiencing less symptoms. First it was influenza season now overlapping with a COVID-19 pandemic. It would be expected to see an increased number of HF admissions.  It is suggested that we might be experiencing the calm before the storm when it comes to HF decompensation requiring hospitalization. The alternative is that social distancing is the remedy that we have long been waiting for to help decrease heart failure exacerbation and hospital re-admissions rates.

On one bright note, during a telehealth cardiology visit follow up with a long-term patient with chronic systolic heart failure known to have been admitted several times during the past year secondary to medication non-adherence, who admits that he has been feeling great. He takes all his medications religiously now, including his diuretics. He states that the fact that he stays home, he doesn’t have to worry about going to the bathroom to urinate so often when he gets out of the house, therefore he doesn’t miss any of his diuretic doses. He is also compliant with diet as he doesn’t eat out as often as he is used to. He admits that he stopped going out to fast food places. This is one very small sample. On the other hand, on another telehealth visit, there is a patient with newly diagnosed Non-Ischemic Cardiomyopathy and HF with reduced ejection fraction, who is been followed for up-titration of guideline directed medical therapy. It was a challenge to safely increase the dose of his medications without vital signs and avoiding to have the patient physically get to a laboratory to get blood work done. As of now, no major changes were made in the patient current management. Of note, patient did ask about holding angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors because of what he heard from another source. Once more, no changes were made to the medical regimen and it was explained that it has been recommended based on different society guidelines and expert consensus report, to continue with ACE inhibitors1.

COVID-19 times are dynamic and medical information is constantly being updated. This is an ongoing discussion as the clinical data comes in. As the pandemic evolves and more telehealth visit under our belts, we will continue to find out more. Although as our health care system is currently fighting the COVID-19; we must brace ourselves for the aftermath whether our patients are dying at home, or slowly decompensating. Only time will tell.  As we are flattening to curve with social distancing, our patients with chronic conditions like HF are waiting at home with so much uncertainties surrounding their current and future medical care. “When life gives you lemon, make lemonade”.

The following suggestions can be useful when taking care of heart failure patients during these unprecedented times. (Figure 1) With COVID-19, we should let our HF patients know although social distancing is essential, they are a higher risk population for a complicated course if infected. It is important to inform them on when to seek medical care, whether it’s to contact a health care provider, call emergency medical services, or go to the emergency department. Although, prevention remains the best medicine. They should take the extra step in precautions and follow the latest recommendations from their local department of public health as we should always remind them of what those recommendations consist of via our telehealth visits.  From a cardiologist stand point, it is important to remain available whether it is via email, pager and/or more frequent telehealth visit if possible.  If they don’t have a scale and/or automatic blood pressure machines, it should be suggested to obtain them along with a thermometer from their local pharmacies. With a phone camera, it is feasible to assess Jugular Venous Distention, pitting edema. In addition, with weight trends, blood pressure and heart rate, clinical decisions could be made.  If available, assessment of data via CardioMEMS can also be very helpful in making medical decisions. Desperate times call for desperate measures.  This is too shall pass. If this is the calm before the storm for our heart failure patients, we should be ready when it hits remembering the sun always shines after a storm.

Figure 1. Heart Failure Care Suggestions During COVID-19

“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.”

 

 

hidden

COVID-19: The Road to Recovery

The disruption COVID-19 has caused globally is nothing short of mind-blowing and extremely fatiguing. On a daily basis, new information is released about economic declines, healthcare burdens, and the ever-changing social distancing norms. Across the US, there are varying degrees of social distancing, shelter-in-place recommendations, and acceptance from the community on steps going forwards. We have recently seen protests to open the country and at times horrific images from the community we are trying to protect. No matter where you may stand on these issues, we can agree the road to recovery from this pandemic for America will be long and challenging. The work going forward will require continued teamwork to keep Americans healthy. Here are a few of my thoughts, in no particular order, that we should keep in mind.

  • Pediatric population: the recent decline in outpatient availability has reduced primary care milestones. Many children are delayed in getting their vaccinations as a result of COVID-19. Plans of efficiently having children receive their vaccinations will be instrumental, especially those who will be of school age.
  • Elective procedures: during this pandemic, in efforts to reduce potential exposure various procedures have been postponed. All across medicine, we have delayed elective cardiac catheterizations, ablations, numerous surgeries, and even radiological imaging. Some institutions have started to plan to have extended operating room hours or even full surgical days on the weekend. All divisions will have to consider the same to be able to catch up with the outpatient procedures. Of course, a tremendous amount of resources will need to be dedicated to this endeavor which adds another layer of complexity.
  • Future clinic visits: something we will have to keep in mind is if we will have clinic days where we only see COVID-19 positive patients. Keeping patients in the waiting rooms safe from potential sources of infection will be of utmost importance. Many epidemiologists believe there will be a second surge but it’s hard to predict it’s impact. Of course, the challenge in America is the lack of universal testing therefore there can be patients who have COVID-19 but were never identified.
  • Health Care Reform: the COVID-19 pandemic in America has highlighted the pitfalls of our health care system. A big share of Americans are uninsured and we as citizens carry more medical debt than our counterparts from other developed nations. And one of the single biggest problems, which is largely American, is cost. In my short career, I frequently meet patients who do not seek medical care due to the costs associated with routine care. I’ve had patients fight with me to use their own medications because the same medications in the hospital setting are exponentially more expensive. The downfalls of the American health system, which already placed us behind our peers on many medical outcomes, have been exposed in this outbreak. I don’t know what the right course is moving forward but I hope to be a part of it.

We are continuing to fight the COVID-19 pandemic with all of our strength and energy, but we have a long road ahead of us. If we continue to work together, collaborate, and utilize our resources efficiently, we will continue to be successful.

“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.”

hidden

Conferences in the Time of COVID

As with pretty much everything else, conference season is going to look a lot different from last year due to COVID-19. Conferences have already switched gears to go completely virtual to meet this challenge but still give scientists the opportunity to share their work with the world. Initially, I was a little bummed about the need to switch meetings to a virtual format — but I then realized that there are also some really great advantages to this situation.

As a new mother, I had already resigned myself that I wouldn’t really be able to participate much in conferences this year, but now that has completely changed. I’m actually going to attend three meetings, including the AHA BCVS conference in July, which I am really excited about. While it would be great to see everyone in person and I know that it won’t completely be the same without the social interactions many of us look forward to, the virtual format provides science opportunities to many that otherwise would have missed out. It’s important in this strange time to celebrate the positives. To get more insight on how to make the best of a virtual meeting, check out fellow blogger Shayan Mohammadmoradi’s latest piece — it’s filled with great tips!

In addition to conferences going virtual, seminars at universities and professional organizations have done the same thing. Once it was apparent that COVID-19 was changing the face of the world, The International Society for Heart Research quickly organized a virtual seminar series that has been keeping researchers from all over the world updated on the latest science. Check out the schedule here to attend any meeting you want via zoom from your home!

If you are planning a meeting, going completely virtual may seem like a daunting task, but since so many have started to work out the kinks to the online format, it’s becoming easier to find resources to help you make the event a success. Additionally, before COVID-19 took hold, many scientists were already pushing the community to move to a virtual system to combat climate change, so this switch may have been inevitable. Online meetings can be just as enriching as the in-person events that we are used to — we just have to keep an open mind.

“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.”