BACKGROUND: The use of drug-eluting stents (DES) is an example of the disparity between recommendations given by regulatory agencies and the real clinical world. Such disparity might lead cardiologists to adopt different routines in the use of DES. We aimed to assess variability of off-label DES use between hospitals and to what extent it can be explained by differences in patient or hospital characteristics. METHODS: Characteristics of consecutive patients receiving DES in 29 hospitals were recorded. Individual and hospital determinants of receiving DES for off-label indications were assessed by multilevel logistic regression. RESULTS: 1903 patients were recruited and 1188 (62.4%) received DES for off-label indications. Individual variables associated with off-label use were age (OR 1.01 (1-1.02)), previous percutaneous (OR 2.24 (1.68-2.97)) or surgical (2.41 (1.52-3.84)) revascularization, repeated procedure at the same admission (OR 4.66 (2.7-8.05)), receiving two (OR 4.17 (3.24-5.37)) or three or more DES (OR 14.12 (9.08-21.96)) vs one. Adjusting for individual variables, the Odds of receiving DES for off-label indication was higher in public funding hospitals with surgery availability vs private hospitals: 1.49 (0.86-2.6), and in public hospitals without surgery vs public with surgery availability: OR 1.76 (1.02-3.03). Interhospital variability reminded significant after adjustment for individual and contextual variables. CONCLUSION: Off-label DES use is highly variable between centers. Although this variability is partially determined by hospital type of funding and cardiac surgery availability, the substantial interhospital variability after multilevel adjustment suggests heterogeneity in the process of care.
BACKGROUND: The use of drug-eluting stents (DES) is an example of the disparity between recommendations given by regulatory agencies and the real clinical world. Such disparity might lead cardiologists to adopt different routines in the use of DES. We aimed to assess variability of off-label DES use between hospitals and to what extent it can be explained by differences in patient or hospital characteristics. METHODS: Characteristics of consecutive patients receiving DES in 29 hospitals were recorded. Individual and hospital determinants of receiving DES for off-label indications were assessed by multilevel logistic regression. RESULTS: 1903 patients were recruited and 1188 (62.4%) received DES for off-label indications. Individual variables associated with off-label use were age (OR 1.01 (1-1.02)), previous percutaneous (OR 2.24 (1.68-2.97)) or surgical (2.41 (1.52-3.84)) revascularization, repeated procedure at the same admission (OR 4.66 (2.7-8.05)), receiving two (OR 4.17 (3.24-5.37)) or three or more DES (OR 14.12 (9.08-21.96)) vs one. Adjusting for individual variables, the Odds of receiving DES for off-label indication was higher in public funding hospitals with surgery availability vs private hospitals: 1.49 (0.86-2.6), and in public hospitals without surgery vs public with surgery availability: OR 1.76 (1.02-3.03). Interhospital variability reminded significant after adjustment for individual and contextual variables. CONCLUSION: Off-label DES use is highly variable between centers. Although this variability is partially determined by hospital type of funding and cardiac surgery availability, the substantial interhospital variability after multilevel adjustment suggests heterogeneity in the process of care.