Literature DB >> 23895810

Temporal trends in percutaneous coronary intervention outcomes among older patients in the United States.

Sunil V Rao1, Connie N Hess, David Dai, Cynthia L Green, Eric D Peterson, Pamela S Douglas.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: New percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) device technologies are often rapidly adopted into clinical practice, yet few studies have examined the overall impact of these new technologies on patient outcomes in community practice.
METHODS: In hopes of determining temporal trends in PCI outcomes, we used data from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Service's Chronic Condition Warehouse (n = 3,250,836) by comparing patient characteristics and rates of 3-year major adverse cardiac events (MACE) across the balloon angioplasty (POBA) era (01/1991-09/1995), the bare metal stent (BMS) era (02/1998-04/2003), and the drug-eluting stent (DES) era (05/2004-10/2006). The adjusted association between era and outcomes was determined with Cox proportional hazards modeling (POBA era as reference).
RESULTS: Compared with the POBA era, patients undergoing PCI were significantly older and had more medical comorbidities, and the risk for 3-year MACE was significantly lower during the BMS and DES eras (BMS vs. POBA adjusted HR [95% CI]: 0.930 [0.926-0.935]; DES vs. BMS: 0.831 [0.827-0.835]). Compared with males, the adjusted risk for 3-year MACE among females was lower during the POBA era, but slightly higher during the BMS and DES eras. Across all three eras, patients ≥75 years of age had higher adjusted risk for MACE compared with younger patients, and the risk for revascularization was lower for both females and older patients.
CONCLUSIONS: Despite its application in older and sicker Medicare beneficiaries, there has been a significant decrease in post-PCI MACE over time. The risk for death or myocardial infarction is higher among females and older patients compared with males and younger patients; therefore, future studies should focus on improving clinical outcomes in these high-risk subgroups.
Copyright © 2013 Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23895810      PMCID: PMC4406473          DOI: 10.1016/j.ahj.2013.05.006

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am Heart J        ISSN: 0002-8703            Impact factor:   4.749


  18 in total

1.  SAS macros for estimation of the cumulative incidence functions based on a Cox regression model for competing risks survival data.

Authors:  Susanne Rosthøj; Per K Andersen; Steen Z Abildstrom
Journal:  Comput Methods Programs Biomed       Date:  2004-04       Impact factor: 5.428

2.  Adapting a clinical comorbidity index for use with ICD-9-CM administrative databases.

Authors:  R A Deyo; D C Cherkin; M A Ciol
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  1992-06       Impact factor: 6.437

3.  2007 Focused Update of the ACC/AHA/SCAI 2005 Guideline Update for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines: 2007 Writing Group to Review New Evidence and Update the ACC/AHA/SCAI 2005 Guideline Update for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention, Writing on Behalf of the 2005 Writing Committee.

Authors:  Spencer B King; Sidney C Smith; John W Hirshfeld; Alice K Jacobs; Douglass A Morrison; David O Williams; Ted E Feldman; Morton J Kern; William W O'Neill; Hartzell V Schaff; Patrick L Whitlow; Cynthia D Adams; Jeffrey L Anderson; Christopher E Buller; Mark A Creager; Steven M Ettinger; Jonathan L Halperin; Sharon A Hunt; Harlan M Krumholz; Frederick G Kushner; Bruce W Lytle; Rick Nishimura; Richard L Page; Barbara Riegel; Lynn G Tarkington; Clyde W Yancy
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2007-12-13       Impact factor: 29.690

4.  Patterns and outcomes of drug-eluting coronary stent use in clinical practice.

Authors:  Sunil V Rao; Richard E Shaw; Ralph G Brindis; Lloyd W Klein; William S Weintraub; Ronald J Krone; Eric D Peterson
Journal:  Am Heart J       Date:  2006-08       Impact factor: 4.749

5.  Impact of bleeding severity on clinical outcomes among patients with acute coronary syndromes.

Authors:  Sunil V Rao; Kristi O'Grady; Karen S Pieper; Christopher B Granger; L Kristin Newby; Frans Van de Werf; Kenneth W Mahaffey; Robert M Califf; Robert A Harrington
Journal:  Am J Cardiol       Date:  2005-09-12       Impact factor: 2.778

6.  Short- and long-term outcomes of coronary stenting in women versus men: results from the National Cardiovascular Data Registry Centers for Medicare & Medicaid services cohort.

Authors:  Monique L Anderson; Eric D Peterson; J Matthew Brennan; Sunil V Rao; David Dai; Kevin J Anstrom; Robert Piana; Andra Popescu; Art Sedrakyan; John C Messenger; Pamela S Douglas
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2012-09-17       Impact factor: 29.690

7.  Mortality differences between men and women after percutaneous coronary interventions. A 25-year, single-center experience.

Authors:  Mandeep Singh; Charanjit S Rihal; Bernard J Gersh; Veronique L Roger; Malcolm R Bell; Ryan J Lennon; Amir Lerman; David R Holmes
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2008-06-17       Impact factor: 24.094

8.  Twenty-five-year trends in in-hospital and long-term outcome after percutaneous coronary intervention: a single-institution experience.

Authors:  Mandeep Singh; Charanjit S Rihal; Bernard J Gersh; Ryan J Lennon; Abhiram Prasad; Paul Sorajja; Rachel E Gullerud; David R Holmes
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2007-05-28       Impact factor: 29.690

9.  Sex differences in medical care and early death after acute myocardial infarction.

Authors:  Hani Jneid; Gregg C Fonarow; Christopher P Cannon; Adrian F Hernandez; Igor F Palacios; Andrew O Maree; Quinn Wells; Biykem Bozkurt; Kenneth A Labresh; Li Liang; Yuling Hong; L Kristin Newby; Gerald Fletcher; Eric Peterson; Laura Wexler
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2008-12-08       Impact factor: 29.690

10.  Sirolimus-eluting stents versus standard stents in patients with stenosis in a native coronary artery.

Authors:  Jeffrey W Moses; Martin B Leon; Jeffrey J Popma; Peter J Fitzgerald; David R Holmes; Charles O'Shaughnessy; Ronald P Caputo; Dean J Kereiakes; David O Williams; Paul S Teirstein; Judith L Jaeger; Richard E Kuntz
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2003-10-02       Impact factor: 91.245

View more
  5 in total

1.  Outcomes of percutaneous coronary intervention in patients ≥ 75 years: one-center study in a Chinese patient group.

Authors:  Peng-Fei Chen; Dan-Ning Wang; Kan Chen; Chun Liang; Yu-Sheng Reng; Jing Yang; Ru Ding; Jacob Blackwell; De-Ning Liao
Journal:  J Geriatr Cardiol       Date:  2015-11       Impact factor: 3.327

2.  Temporal Trends in Percutaneous Coronary Intervention and Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting: Insights From the Washington Cardiac Care Outcomes Assessment Program.

Authors:  Akash Kataruka; Charles C Maynard; Kathleen E Kearney; Ahmed Mahmoud; Sean Bell; Jacob A Doll; James M McCabe; Chistopher Bryson; Hitinder S Gurm; Hani Jneid; Salim S Virani; Eric Lehr; Michael E Ring; Ravi S Hira
Journal:  J Am Heart Assoc       Date:  2020-05-27       Impact factor: 5.501

3.  Temporal trends in prevalence and outcomes of atrial fibrillation in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention.

Authors:  Yusuke Morita; Toka Hamaguchi; Yuhei Yamaji; Hideyuki Hayashi; Eisaku Nakane; Yoshisumi Haruna; Tetsuya Haruna; Michiya Hanyu; Moriaki Inoko
Journal:  Clin Cardiol       Date:  2019-11-06       Impact factor: 2.882

4.  Characteristics of Early and Late Adopting Hospitals Providing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Taiwan.

Authors:  Tsung-Hsueh Lu; Yu-Tung Huang; Jo-Chi Lee; Li-Tan Yang; Fu-Wen Liang; Wei-Hsian Yin; Ichiro Kawachi
Journal:  J Am Heart Assoc       Date:  2015-12-23       Impact factor: 5.501

5.  Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Is More Beneficial Than Optimal Medical Therapy in Elderly Patients with Angina Pectoris.

Authors:  Hoyoun Won; Ae Young Her; Byeong Keuk Kim; Yong Hoon Kim; Dong Ho Shin; Jung Sun Kim; Young Guk Ko; Donghoon Choi; Hyuck Moon Kwon; Yangsoo Jang; Myeong Ki Hong
Journal:  Yonsei Med J       Date:  2016-03       Impact factor: 2.759

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.