Background Guideline-based cardioprotective medical therapy is intended to reduce the burden of adverse cardiovascular and limb outcomes in patients with peripheral artery disease (PAD). However, contemporary data describing trends in use of medication remains limited. The present study, therefore, aims to investigate changes in use of cardioprotective medication in PAD. Methods and Results By using Danish national healthcare registries, we identified all patients with first-time diagnosis of PAD (1997-2016) and classified them into two groups: (1) PAD+ that includes all patients with PAD with a history of cardiovascular disease, ie, myocardial infarction, atrial fibrillation, and stroke (n=162 627); and (2) PAD (n=87 935) that comprise patients without a history of cardiovascular disease. We determined the use of medication in the first 12 months after the incident diagnosis of PAD and estimated age standardized 1-year mortality rates. Our results showed increase in use of cardioprotective medication throughout the study period in both groups. However, PAD+ had a higher use of medication (acetylsalicylic acid, 3.5%-48.4%; Clopidogrel, 0%-17.6%; vitamin K antagonists, 0.9%-7.8%; new oral anticoagulants, 0.0%-10.1%; Statins, 1.9%-58.1%; angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, 1.2%-20.6%), compared with PAD (acetylsalicylic acid, 2.9%-54.4%; Clopidogrel, 0%-11.9%; vitamin K antagonists, 0.9%-2.4%; new oral anticoagulants, 0.0%-3.4%; Statins, 1.5%-56.9%; angiotensin-converting enzyme, 0.9%-17.2%), respectively. Furthermore, 1-year mortality rates in PAD declined with increased use of medications during study. Conclusions In this nationwide study, use of cardioprotective medication increased considerably with time, but compared to patients with other atherosclerotic diseases, there remains an underuse of guideline-based medical therapy in patients with PAD.

Background Citizen responder programs are implemented worldwide to dispatch volunteer citizens to participate in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest resuscitation. However, the risk of injuries in relation to activation is largely unknown. We aimed to assess the risk of physical injury for dispatched citizen responders. Methods and Results Since September 2017, citizen responders have been activated through a smartphone application when located close to a suspected cardiac arrest in the Capital Region of Denmark. A survey was sent to all activated citizen responders, including a specific question about risk of acquiring an injury during activation. We included all surveys from September 1, 2017, to May 15, 2020. From May 15, 2019, to May 15, 2020, we followed up on all survey nonresponders by phone call, e-mail, or text messages to examine if nonresponders were at higher risk of severe or fatal injuries. In 1665 suspected out-of-hospital cardiac arrests, 9574 citizen responders were dispatched and 76.6% (7334) answered the question regarding physical injury. No injury was reported by 99.3% (7281) of the responders. Being at risk of physical injury was reported by 0.3% (24), whereas 0.4% (26) reported an injury (25 minor injuries and 1 severe injury [ankle fracture]). When following up on nonresponders (2472), we reached 99.1% (2449). No one reported acquired injuries, and only 1 reported being at risk of injury. Conclusions We found low risk of physical injury reported by volunteer citizen responders dispatched to out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. Risk of injury should be considered and monitored as a safety measure in citizen responder programs.

Background Little is known about how COVID-19 influenced engagement of citizen responders dispatched to out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) by a smartphone application. The objective was to describe and analyze the Danish Citizen Responder Program and bystander interventions (both citizen responders and nondispatched bystanders) during the first COVID-19 lockdown in 2020. Methods and Results All OHCAs from January 1, 2020, to June 30, 2020, with citizen responder activation in 2 regions of Denmark were included. We compared citizen responder engagement for OHCA in the nonlockdown period (January 1, 2020, to March 10, 2020, and April 21, 2020, to June 30, 2020) with the lockdown period (March 11, 2020, to April 20, 2020). Data are displayed in the order lockdown versus nonlockdown period. Bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation rates did not differ in the 2 periods (99% versus 92%; P=0.07). Bystander defibrillation (9% versus 14%; P=0.4) or return-of-spontaneous circulation (23% versus 23%; P=1.0) also did not differ. A similar amount of citizen responders accepted alarms during the lockdown (6 per alarm; interquartile range, 6) compared with the nonlockdown period (5 per alarm; interquartile range, 5) (P=0.05). More citizen responders reported performing chest-compression-only cardiopulmonary resuscitation during lockdown compared with nonlockdown (79% versus 59%; P=0.0029), whereas fewer performed standardized cardiopulmonary resuscitation, including ventilations (19% versus 38%; P=0.0061). Finally, during lockdown, more citizen responders reported being not psychologically affected by attending an OHCA compared with nonlockdown period (68% versus 56%; P<0.0001). Likewise, fewer reported being mildly affected during lockdown (26%) compared with nonlockdown (35%) (P=0.003). Conclusions The COVID-19 lockdown in Denmark was not associated with decreased bystander-initiated resuscitation in OHCAs attended by citizen responders.

Midregional proadrenomedullin (MR-proADM) has demonstrated prognostic potential after myocardial infarction (MI). Yet, the prognostic value of MR-proADM at admission has not been examined in patients with ST-segment-elevation MI (STEMI).

Many patients who suffer an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest will fail to receive bystander intervention (cardiopulmonary resuscitation [CPR] or defibrillation) despite widespread CPR training and the dissemination of automated external defibrillators (AEDs). We sought to investigate what factors encourage lay bystanders to initiate CPR and AED use in a cohort of bystanders previously trained in CPR techniques who were present at an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest.

Background Following the implementation of the HeartRescue project, with interventions in the community, emergency medical services, and hospitals to improve care and outcomes for out-of-hospital cardiac arrests (OHCA) in North Carolina, improved bystander and first responder treatments as well as survival were observed. This study aimed to determine whether these improvements were consistent across Black versus White individuals. Methods and Results Using the Cardiac Arrest Registry to Enhance Survival (CARES), we identified OHCA from 16 counties in North Carolina (population 3 million) from 2010 to 2014. Temporal changes in interventions and outcomes were assessed using multilevel multivariable logistic regression, adjusted for patient and socioeconomic neighborhood-level factors. Of 7091 patients with OHCA, 36.5% were Black and 63.5% were White. Black patients were younger, more females, had more unwitnessed arrests and non-shockable rhythm (Black: 81.0%; White: 75.4%). From 2010 to 2014, the adjusted probabilities of bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) went from 38.5% to 51.2% in White, P<0.001; and 36.9% to 45.6% in Black, P=0.002, and first-responder defibrillation went from 13.2% to 17.2% in White, P=0.002; and 14.7% to 17.3% in Black, P=0.16. From 2010 to 2014, survival to discharge only increased in White (8.0% to 11.4%, P=0.004; Black 8.9% to 9.5%, P=0.60), though, in shockable patients the probability of survival to discharge went from 24.8% to 34.6% in White, P=0.02; and 21.7% to 29.0% in Black, P=0. 10. Conclusions After the HeartRescue program, bystander CPR and first-responder defibrillation increased in both patient groups; however, survival only increased significantly for White patients.

The electrocardiographic interatrial block (IAB) has been associated with atrial fibrillation (AF). We aimed to test whether IAB can improve risk prediction of AF for the individual person.

Background Dietary vitamin K (K1 and K2) may reduce atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) risk via several mechanisms. However, studies linking vitamin K intake with incident ASCVD are limited. We aimed to determine the relationship between dietary vitamin K intake and ASCVD hospitalizations. Methods and Results In this prospective cohort study, participants from the Danish Diet, Cancer, and Health Study, with no prior ASCVD, completed a food-frequency questionnaire at baseline and were followed up for hospital admissions of ASCVD; ischemic heart disease, ischemic stroke, or peripheral artery disease. Intakes of vitamin K1 and vitamin K2 were estimated from the food-frequency questionnaire, and their relationship with ASCVD hospitalizations was determined using Cox proportional hazards models. Among 53 372 Danish citizens with a median (interquartile range) age of 56 (52-60) years, 8726 individuals were hospitalized for any ASCVD during 21 (17-22) years of follow-up. Compared with participants with the lowest vitamin K1 intakes, participants with the highest intakes had a 21% lower risk of an ASCVD-related hospitalization (hazard ratio, 0.79; 95% CI: 0.74-0.84), after multivariable adjustments for relevant demographic covariates. Likewise for vitamin K2, the risk of an ASCVD-related hospitalization for participants with the highest intakes was 14% lower than participants with the lowest vitamin K2 intake (hazard ratio, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.81-0.91). Conclusions Risk of ASCVD was inversely associated with diets high in vitamin K1 or K2. The similar inverse associations with both vitamin K1 and K2, despite very different dietary sources, highlight the potential importance of vitamin K for ASCVD prevention.

Background The optimal timing of invasive examination and treatment of high-risk patients with non-ST-segment-elevation acute coronary syndrome has not been established. We investigated the efficacy of early invasive coronary angiography compared with standard-care invasive coronary angiography on the risk of all-cause mortality according to the GRACE (Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events) risk score in a predefined subgroup analysis of the VERDICT (Very Early Versus Deferred Invasive Evaluation Using Computerized Tomography) trial. Methods and Results Patients with clinical suspicion of non-ST-segment-elevation acute coronary syndrome with ECG changes indicating new ischemia and/or elevated troponin, in whom invasive coronary angiography was clinically indicated and deemed logistically feasible within 12 hours, were eligible for inclusion. Patients were randomized 1:1 to an early (≤12 hours) or standard (48-72 hours) invasive strategy. The primary outcome of the present study was all-cause mortality. Of 2147 patients randomized in the VERDICT trial, 2092 patients had an available GRACE risk score. Of these, 1021 (48.8%) patients had a GRACE score >140. During a median follow-up of 4.1 years, 192 (18.8%) and 54 (5.0%) patients died in the high and low GRACE score groups, respectively. The risk of death with the early invasive strategy was increased in patients with a GRACE score ≤140 (hazard ratio [HR], 2.04 [95% CI, 1.16-3.59]), whereas there was a trend toward a decreased risk of death with the early invasive strategy in patients with a GRACE score >140 (HR, 0.83 [95% CI, 0.63-1.10]) (Pinteraction=0.006). Conclusions In patients with non-ST-segment-elevation acute coronary syndrome, we found a significant interaction between timing of invasive coronary angiography and GRACE score on the risk of death. Randomized clinical trials are warranted to establish the efficacy and safety among high-risk and low-risk patients with non-ST-segment-elevation acute coronary syndrome. Registration URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT02061891.