OBJECTIVE: To report the case of a patient who underwent orthotopic heart transplant (OHT) and demonstrated a supratherapeutic response to ezetimibe when administered with cyclosporine. CASE SUMMARY: Ezetimibe 10 mg/day was added to the lipid-lowering regimen (atorvastatin 40 mg/day) of a 64-year-old male patient after OHT to achieve a target low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) level ≤97 mg/dL, as recommended by national guidelines. After 2 months of ezetimibe, the patient's LDL-C level had decreased by 60% to 51 mg/dL. Subsequently, the dose of ezetimibe was reduced to 5 mg/day and, after another 2 months, a repeat lipid panel revealed LDL-C 57 mg/dL. DISCUSSION: Hyperlipidemia is a common problem among heart transplant recipients. Combination therapy using a statin plus ezetimibe appears to be an attractive option to achieve target lipid levels in this population. However, the manufacturer warns that ezetimibe should be administered cautiously in patients concomitantly receiving cyclosporine. Unpublished data suggest a pharmacokinetic interaction between ezetimibe and cyclosporine that results in a significant 2.3- to 12-fold increase in exposure to total ezetimibe. An objective causality assessment in this case revealed that this supratherapeutic LDL-C reduction was probably related to coadministration of ezetimibe and cyclosporine. A potential mechanism to explain this interaction might be an alteration in glucuronidation induced by cyclosporine. CONCLUSIONS: When ezetimibe is prescribed for patients concomitantly receiving cyclosporine, it should be initiated at a lower than recommended dose (≤5 mg/day) and titrated upward. Careful and consistent monitoring of patients on this combination is also advised.
BACKGROUND: Wide interhospital variations exist in cardiovascular intensive care unit (CICU) admission practices and the use of critical care restricted therapies (CCRx), but little is known about the differences in patient acuity, CCRx utilization, and the associated outcomes within tertiary centers. METHODS: The Critical Care Cardiology Trials Network is a multicenter registry of tertiary and academic CICUs in the United States and Canada that captured consecutive admissions in 2-month periods between 2017 and 2022. This analysis included 17 843 admissions across 34 sites and compared interhospital tertiles of CCRx (eg, mechanical ventilation, mechanical circulatory support, continuous renal replacement therapy) utilization and its adjusted association with in-hospital survival using logistic regression. The Pratt index was used to quantify patient-related and institutional factors associated with CCRx variability. RESULTS: The median age of the study population was 66 (56–77) years and 37% were female. CCRx was provided to 62.2% (interhospital range of 21.3%–87.1%) of CICU patients. Admissions to CICUs with the highest tertile of CCRx utilization had a greater burden of comorbidities, had more diagnoses of ST–elevation myocardial infarction, cardiac arrest, or cardiogenic shock, and had higher Sequential Organ Failure Assessment scores. The unadjusted in-hospital mortality (median, 12.7%) was 9.6%, 11.1%, and 18.7% in low, intermediate, and high CCRx tertiles, respectively. No clinically meaningful differences in adjusted mortality were observed across tertiles when admissions were stratified by the provision of CCRx. Baseline patient-level variables and institutional differences accounted for 80% and 5.3% of the observed CCRx variability, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In a large registry of tertiary and academic CICUs, there was a >4-fold interhospital variation in the provision of CCRx that was primarily driven by differences in patient acuity compared with institutional differences. No differences were observed in adjusted mortality between low, intermediate, and high CCRx utilization sites.
Our aim was to evaluate the long-term device performance and clinical outcomes of patients with symptomatic, severe aortic valve stenosis (AS) who underwent transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) with the CoreValve bioprosthesis.The CoreValve CE Pivotal Study was a prospective, multicentre, single-arm TAVI trial using the CoreValve system. Valve performance, patient quality of life (QoL), New York Heart Association (NYHA) class, and mortality at four years were analysed in 126 patients (mean age 82.4 years, 42.9% male, mean logistic EuroSCORE 23.4%) with severe AS. Mean aortic valve gradient decreased from 46.9±16.1 mmHg at baseline to 9.8±4.1 mmHg at discharge and to 7.8±2.7 mmHg at four years. Mean effective orifice area increased from 0.7±0.2 cm2 to 1.8±0.4 cm2 after TAVI and was 1.6±0.5 cm2 at four years. There were no reports of structural valve deterioration or valve migration. There was sustained improvement in QoL and NYHA class in surviving patients. All-cause and cardiac survival was 45.3% and 62.6%, respectively, at four years.The CoreValve bioprosthesis demonstrates long-term durability, stable haemodynamic function, and no evidence of structural deterioration. Most surviving patients continued to have improved NYHA class and QoL at four years.
Background: While warfarin is efficacious for the prevention of thromboembolic disorders, many patients are undertreated. To optimize therapy, anticoagulation management services (AMSs) deliver a coordinated, focused approach to this care; however, AMSs are limited in their ability to impact patients outside of tertiary care settings. Objective: To describe the methods used to develop community-based AMSs across Alberta. Methods: Through a three-staged approach, this project created community-based, pharmacist-managed AMSs for patients requiring warfarin therapy. Stage I was the initiation of a central or “core” AMS, located at a quaternary referral centre. Starting with the core enabled us to develop and test the program and create an environment to serve as a training and support centre for future aspects of the program. Next, an educational program was developed and implemented (Stage II) for a diverse group of pharmacists to establish and manage a community-based or “satellite” AMS (Stage III) at their practice site. All three stages are undergoing detailed evaluation, capturing project-specific (patient outcome) data as well as system-level (integration within the health care infrastructure) data. Conclusion: By offering a focused, coordinated, and consistent approach to warfarin management, with ongoing collaboration with other providers, the ultimate goal of this program is to optimize patient outcomes. Utilizing pharmacists as central players within a collaborative setting will enhance the use of our current infrastructure. This program may serve as a model for other health regions and other chronic diseases.
