Literature DB >> 16980517

Outcome of percutaneous coronary intervention in hospitals with and without on-site cardiac surgery standby.

Jörg Carlsson1, Stefan N James, Elisabeth Ståhle, Sebastian Höfer, Bo Lagerqvist.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To compare characteristics and outcome of patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in clinics with (WSB) or without (NOSB) on-site cardiac surgery backup.
DESIGN: Analysis according to hospital, type of prospectively collected data of all patients who underwent PCI during 2000-3.
SETTING: The Swedish Coronary Angiography and Angioplasty Registry covers all PCI procedures performed in Sweden. PATIENTS: 34,363 patients underwent PCI between January 2000 and December 2003. 8838 procedures were performed in NOSB (mean age of patients was 64.5 years) hospitals and 25,525 in WSB (mean age of patients was 64.1 years) hospitals (p = 0.002).
RESULTS: More patients in NOSB hospitals had diabetes (17.8% vs 16.8%; p = 0.03). Other clinical characteristics (previous infarct, previous coronary artery bypass graft (CABG)) also showed a tendency towards worse patients being treated in NOSB hospitals. However, there was a higher percentage of patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (18% vs 9.7%; p<0.01) in WSB hospitals. After adjusting for differences in baseline risk no significant differences regarding outcome (30-day mortality, 1-year mortality, stroke and emergency CABG) were observable between WSB and NOSB hospitals. This applied to elective and non-elective procedures.
CONCLUSIONS: On the basis of these data it does not seem warranted to recommend against percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty in NOSB hospitals.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16980517      PMCID: PMC1861454          DOI: 10.1136/hrt.2006.098061

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Heart        ISSN: 1355-6037            Impact factor:   5.994


  27 in total

1.  Diagnostic and therapeutic percutaneous cardiac interventions without on-site surgical backup--review of 11 years experience.

Authors:  Yoav Turgeman; Shaul Atar; Khalid Suleiman; Alexander Feldman; Lev Bloch; Nahum A Freedberg; Dante Antonelli; Mohamed Jabaren; Tiberio Rosenfeld
Journal:  Isr Med Assoc J       Date:  2003-02       Impact factor: 0.892

2.  Percutaneous coronary interventions without on-site cardiac surgery: a stretch for much-needed evidence.

Authors:  Thomas J Ryan
Journal:  Am Heart J       Date:  2003-02       Impact factor: 4.749

Review 3.  Rationale for on-site cardiac surgery for primary angioplasty: a time for reappraisal.

Authors:  Mandeep Singh; Henry H Ting; Peter B Berger; Kirk N Garratt; David R Holmes; Bernard J Gersh
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2002-06-19       Impact factor: 24.094

4.  Is onsite surgery backup necessary for percutaneous coronary interventions?

Authors:  W Douglas Weaver
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2004-10-27       Impact factor: 56.272

5.  Management of acute coronary occlusion during percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty: experience of complications in a hospital without on site facilities for cardiac surgery.

Authors:  S G Richardson; P Morton; J G Murtagh; D B O'Keeffe; P Murphy; M E Scott
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1990-02-10

6.  Coronary morphologic and clinical determinants of procedural outcome with angioplasty for multivessel coronary disease. Implications for patient selection. Multivessel Angioplasty Prognosis Study Group.

Authors:  S G Ellis; M G Vandormael; M J Cowley; G DiSciascio; U Deligonul; E J Topol; T M Bulle
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  1990-10       Impact factor: 29.690

7.  Effects of endoluminal coronary stents on the frequency of coronary artery bypass grafting after unsuccessful percutaneous transluminal coronary vascularization.

Authors:  J Lindsay; M K Hong; E E Pinnow; A D Pichard
Journal:  Am J Cardiol       Date:  1996-03-15       Impact factor: 2.778

8.  Transluminal dilatation of coronary-artery stenosis.

Authors:  A Gruntzig
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1978-02-04       Impact factor: 79.321

9.  Outcomes of percutaneous coronary interventions performed at centers without and with onsite coronary artery bypass graft surgery.

Authors:  David E Wennberg; F Lee Lucas; Andrea E Siewers; Merle A Kellett; David J Malenka
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2004-10-27       Impact factor: 56.272

10.  Stand-by versus stent-by during percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty.

Authors:  J C Stauffer; E Eeckhout; P Vogt; L Kappenberger; J J Goy
Journal:  Am Heart J       Date:  1995-07       Impact factor: 4.749

View more
  6 in total

1.  The trials and tribulations of percutaneous coronary intervention in hospitals without on-site CABG surgery.

Authors:  Scott Kinlay
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2011-12-14       Impact factor: 56.272

2.  On-site surgical standby for percutaneous coronary intervention: a thing of the past?

Authors:  Mark A de Belder
Journal:  Heart       Date:  2007-03       Impact factor: 5.994

3.  PCI with or without surgical standby.

Authors:  Gianluigi Bisleri; Tomaso Bottio; Claudio Muneretto; Nicola Berlinghieri
Journal:  Heart       Date:  2007-12       Impact factor: 5.994

4.  Percutaneous coronary intervention without onsite surgical backup.

Authors:  Gregory J Dehmer
Journal:  Curr Cardiol Rep       Date:  2008-09       Impact factor: 2.931

5.  In-hospital outcomes after elective and non-elective percutaneous coronary interventions in hospitals with and without on-site cardiac surgery backup.

Authors:  Ulrich Tebbe; Matthias Hochadel; Peter Bramlage; Sebastian Kerber; Rainer Hambrecht; Eberhard Grube; Karl E Hauptmann; Martin Gottwik; Albrecht Elsässer; Hans-Georg Glunz; Tassilo Bonzel; Jörg Carlsson; Uwe Zeymer; Ralf Zahn; Jochen Senges
Journal:  Clin Res Cardiol       Date:  2009-07-14       Impact factor: 5.460

6.  Outcomes of a system-wide protocol for elective and nonelective coronary angioplasty at sites without on-site surgery: the Mayo Clinic experience.

Authors:  Mandeep Singh; Bernard J Gersh; Ryan J Lennon; Henry H Ting; David R Holmes; Brendan J Doyle; Charanjit S Rihal
Journal:  Mayo Clin Proc       Date:  2009-06       Impact factor: 7.616

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.