AIM: Primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI) produces more effective coronary reperfusion and allows immediate risk stratification compared with fibrinolysis. We investigated the safety and feasibility of very early discharge at 2 days following PPCI in selected low-risk cases. METHODS: This was a prospective observational cohort study of 2779 patients who underwent PPCI between 2004 and 2011. Patients meeting the following criteria were deemed suitable for very early discharge; TIMI III flow, left ventricle (LF) ejection fraction >40%, and rhythmic and haemodynamic stability out to 48 h. Higher-risk patients who did not fulfil these criteria were discharged later according to physician preference. All patients were offered outpatient review by a multidisciplinary team. Endpoints included 30 day readmission rates and major adverse cardiac events (MACE) out to a median of 2.8 years (IQR range: 1.3-4.4 years). RESULTS: 1309 (49.3%) PPCI patients met very early discharge criteria, of whom 1117 (85.3%) were actually discharged at 2 days. 620 (23.4%) were discharged at 3 days, and 916 (34.5%) >3 days after admission (median 5, IQR: 4-8) days). Patients discharged at 2 days were younger, and had lower rates of diabetes, renal dysfunction, multivessel coronary artery disease, previous myocardial infarction, and previous coronary artery bypass surgery, compared with patients discharged later. 30-day readmission rates for non-MACE events were 4.8%, 4.9% and 4.6% for patients discharged 2 days, 3 days and >3 days after admission, respectively. MACE rates were lowest in patients discharged at 2 days (9.6%, 95% CI 4.7% to 16.6%) compared with patients discharged at 3 days (12.3% 95% CI 6.0% to 19.2%) and >3 days (28.6% 95% CI 22.9% to 34.7%, p<0.0001) after admission. CONCLUSIONS: Our data suggest that discharge of low-risk patients 2 days after successful PPCI is feasible and safe. Over 40% of all patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction may be suitable for early discharge with important implications for healthcare costs.
AIM: Primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI) produces more effective coronary reperfusion and allows immediate risk stratification compared with fibrinolysis. We investigated the safety and feasibility of very early discharge at 2 days following PPCI in selected low-risk cases. METHODS: This was a prospective observational cohort study of 2779 patients who underwent PPCI between 2004 and 2011. Patients meeting the following criteria were deemed suitable for very early discharge; TIMI III flow, left ventricle (LF) ejection fraction >40%, and rhythmic and haemodynamic stability out to 48 h. Higher-risk patients who did not fulfil these criteria were discharged later according to physician preference. All patients were offered outpatient review by a multidisciplinary team. Endpoints included 30 day readmission rates and major adverse cardiac events (MACE) out to a median of 2.8 years (IQR range: 1.3-4.4 years). RESULTS: 1309 (49.3%) PPCI patients met very early discharge criteria, of whom 1117 (85.3%) were actually discharged at 2 days. 620 (23.4%) were discharged at 3 days, and 916 (34.5%) >3 days after admission (median 5, IQR: 4-8) days). Patients discharged at 2 days were younger, and had lower rates of diabetes, renal dysfunction, multivessel coronary artery disease, previous myocardial infarction, and previous coronary artery bypass surgery, compared with patients discharged later. 30-day readmission rates for non-MACE events were 4.8%, 4.9% and 4.6% for patients discharged 2 days, 3 days and >3 days after admission, respectively. MACE rates were lowest in patients discharged at 2 days (9.6%, 95% CI 4.7% to 16.6%) compared with patients discharged at 3 days (12.3% 95% CI 6.0% to 19.2%) and >3 days (28.6% 95% CI 22.9% to 34.7%, p<0.0001) after admission. CONCLUSIONS: Our data suggest that discharge of low-risk patients 2 days after successful PPCI is feasible and safe. Over 40% of all patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction may be suitable for early discharge with important implications for healthcare costs.
Authors: Joseph E Ebinger; Craig E Strauss; Ross R Garberich; Steven M Bradley; Pam Rush; Ivan J Chavez; Anil K Poulose; Brandon R Porten; Timothy D Henry Journal: Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes Date: 2018-04
Authors: Zain Ul Abideen Asad; Safi U Khan; Amod Amritphale; Adhir Shroff; Kusum Lata; Arnold H Seto; Muhammad Shahzeb Khan; Sunil V Rao; Mazen Abu-Fadel Journal: Cardiovasc Revasc Med Date: 2020-05-01
Authors: Dirk A A M Schellings; Ahmet Adiyaman; Evangelos Giannitsis; Christian Hamm; Harry Suryapranata; Jurrien M Ten Berg; Jan C A Hoorntje; Arnoud W J Van't Hof Journal: J Am Heart Assoc Date: 2014-11-11 Impact factor: 5.501
Authors: Marie-Eva Laurencet; François Girardin; Fabio Rigamonti; Anne Bevand; Philippe Meyer; David Carballo; Marco Roffi; Stéphane Noble; François Mach; Baris Gencer Journal: PLoS One Date: 2016-08-23 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: D A A M Schellings; A W J van 't Hof; J M Ten Berg; A Elvan; E Giannitsis; C Hamm; H Suryapranata; A Adiyaman Journal: Neth Heart J Date: 2017-04 Impact factor: 2.380