Hall, Joseph M

Pauly, Thomas H

Zaibun Nissa Siraj

Stephen, Lynn

Mentinis, Mihalis

González, Roberto J. (Roberto Jesús), 1969-

Vågnes, Øyvind, 1972-

Cousineau, Robert Henri

Scherer, Manual

Spencer, Scott, 1975-

Gaboury, Paul R

McKinney, Gordon B., 1943-

Stahl, Alan M., 1947-

Barsky, Robert F

Jaffe, Irma B

Mruk, Christopher J

Winkler, Ira

Sankey, Jay, 1963-

Austin, James H., 1925-

Austin, James H., 1925-

Lam, Harry C. S

Pickover, Clifford A

Morrell, Sachiko Kaneko, 1930-

Aitken, Robert, 1917-2010

Ring, Laura A., 1968-

Callaars, Josephus

Badger, Michael

Badger, Michael

Mazur, Gail

McLeod, Doug

Akgul, Faruk

Sawyer, R. Keith (Robert Keith)

Mwanaka, Tendai R

Thompson, Katrina Daly, 1975-

Nyathi, Pathisa, 1951-

Sachikonye, L. M

Khan, Shahnaz

American Water Works Association

Ehrlich, Walter, 1921-

Rotenstreich, Nathan, 1914-1993

Bardin, Hillel

This prespecified secondary analysis of the MOMENTUM 3 randomized clinical trial aims to determine whether clinical outcomes of patients with 2 different left ventricular assist devices differed based on preoperative categories of bridge to transplant/bridge to candidacy vs destination therapy.

This study develops and validates a quantitative method to predict the pulmonary to systemic flow ratio in patients with congenital heart disease from chest radiographs using deep learning.

Increased attention has focused on shared decision-making (SDM) and use of decision aids for treatment decisions in cardiology. In this issue of JAMA Cardiology, Coylewright et al report the results of a rigorously performed pilot study on the use of a decision aid to facilitate SDM for patients with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis (AS) at high or prohibitive risk for surgery considered for transcatheter aortic valve replacement vs medical therapy. Comparisons were made between encounters before clinicians were trained to use a decision aid and the first and fifth encounters after a decision aid was used. The patient-clinician interactions were audio recorded and later coded by independent reviewers using a validated measure to assess SDM. This mixed-methods study found that SDM significantly improved in a stepwise manner from the initial usual care encounter (before use of a decision aid) to the first and then fifth encounters after implementation of the decision aid. Along with this improvement in SDM, patients (n = 35) demonstrated increased knowledge about their treatment choices and reported increased satisfaction in their care with no increase in decisional conflict. In contrast, clinicians (n = 6) reported that they believed they already engaged in SDM prior to use of the decision aid and, after multiple uses of the decision aid, believed patients did not understand or benefit from this tool. The disconnect between clinician and patient perspectives was sobering and has implications for the adoption of decision aids or other tools to facilitate SDM in the clinical setting. Notable limitations of the study, which are acknowledged by the authors, include (1) small sample size (of clinicians and patients); (2) the decision aid is most useful for the relatively smaller number of patients at high or prohibitive risk for surgery for whom transcatheter aortic valve replacement and medical therapy may both be reasonable options; and (3) the lack of diversity in the clinicians (all male), which reflects the current demographics of interventional cardiology and cardiac surgery.