OBJECTIVES: This study sought to update and validate a contemporary model for inpatient mortality following percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), including variables indicating high clinical risk. BACKGROUND: Recently, new variables were added to the CathPCI Registry data collection form. This modification allowed us to better characterize the risk of death, including recent cardiac arrest and duration of cardiogenic shock. METHODS: Data from 1,208,137 PCI procedures performed between July 2009 and June 2011 at 1,252 CathPCI Registry sites were used to develop both a "full" and pre-catheterization PCI in-hospital mortality risk model using logistic regression. To support prospective implementation, a simplified bedside risk score was derived from the pre-catheterization risk model. Model performance was assessed by discrimination and calibration metrics in a separate split sample. RESULTS: In-hospital mortality was 1.4%, ranging from 0.2% among elective cases (45.1% of total cases) to 65.9% among patients with shock and recent cardiac arrest (0.2% of total cases). Cardiogenic shock and procedure urgency were the most predictive of inpatient mortality, whereas the presence of a chronic total occlusion, subacute stent thrombosis, and left main lesion location were significant angiographic predictors. The full, pre-catheterization, and bedside risk prediction models performed well in the overall validation sample (C-indexes 0.930, 0.928, 0.925, respectively) and among pre-specified patient subgroups. The model was well calibrated across the risk spectrum, although slightly overestimating risk in the highest risk patients. CONCLUSIONS: Clinical acuity is a strong predictor of PCI procedural mortality. With inclusion of variables that further characterize clinical stability, the updated CathPCI Registry mortality models remain well-calibrated across the spectrum of PCI risk.
OBJECTIVES: This study sought to update and validate a contemporary model for inpatient mortality following percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), including variables indicating high clinical risk. BACKGROUND: Recently, new variables were added to the CathPCI Registry data collection form. This modification allowed us to better characterize the risk of death, including recent cardiac arrest and duration of cardiogenic shock. METHODS: Data from 1,208,137 PCI procedures performed between July 2009 and June 2011 at 1,252 CathPCI Registry sites were used to develop both a "full" and pre-catheterization PCI in-hospital mortality risk model using logistic regression. To support prospective implementation, a simplified bedside risk score was derived from the pre-catheterization risk model. Model performance was assessed by discrimination and calibration metrics in a separate split sample. RESULTS: In-hospital mortality was 1.4%, ranging from 0.2% among elective cases (45.1% of total cases) to 65.9% among patients with shock and recent cardiac arrest (0.2% of total cases). Cardiogenic shock and procedure urgency were the most predictive of inpatient mortality, whereas the presence of a chronic total occlusion, subacute stent thrombosis, and left main lesion location were significant angiographic predictors. The full, pre-catheterization, and bedside risk prediction models performed well in the overall validation sample (C-indexes 0.930, 0.928, 0.925, respectively) and among pre-specified patient subgroups. The model was well calibrated across the risk spectrum, although slightly overestimating risk in the highest risk patients. CONCLUSIONS: Clinical acuity is a strong predictor of PCI procedural mortality. With inclusion of variables that further characterize clinical stability, the updated CathPCI Registry mortality models remain well-calibrated across the spectrum of PCI risk.
Authors: Stephen W Waldo; Eric A Secemsky; Cashel O'Brien; Kevin F Kennedy; Eugene Pomerantsev; Thoralf M Sundt; Edward J McNulty; Benjamin M Scirica; Robert W Yeh Journal: Circulation Date: 2014-11-12 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Revathi Balakrishnan; Jeffrey S Berger; Lisa Tully; Anish Vani; Binita Shah; Joseph Burdowski; Edward Fisher; Arthur Schwartzbard; Steven Sedlis; Howard Weintraub; James A Underberg; Ann Danoff; James A Slater; Eugenia Gianos Journal: Diabetes Metab Res Rev Date: 2015-05-12 Impact factor: 4.876
Authors: Ashwin S Nathan; Qun Xiang; Daniel Wojdyla; Sameed Ahmed M Khatana; Elias J Dayoub; Rishi K Wadhera; Deepak L Bhatt; Daniel M Kolansky; Ajay J Kirtane; Sunil V Rao; Robert W Yeh; Peter W Groeneveld; Tracy Y Wang; Jay Giri Journal: JAMA Cardiol Date: 2020-07-01 Impact factor: 14.676
Authors: Deepak Acharya; Brian C Gulack; Renzo Y Loyaga-Rendon; James E Davies; Xia He; J Matthew Brennan; Vinod H Thourani; Matthew L Williams Journal: Ann Thorac Surg Date: 2015-12-22 Impact factor: 4.330
Authors: Matthew W Sherwood; J Matthew Brennan; Kalon K Ho; Frederick A Masoudi; John C Messenger; W Douglas Weaver; David Dai; Eric D Peterson Journal: JACC Cardiovasc Interv Date: 2014-12-10 Impact factor: 11.195
Authors: Gregory J Dehmer; Jonathan Jennings; Ruth A Madden; David J Malenka; Frederick A Masoudi; Charles R McKay; Debra L Ness; Sunil V Rao; Frederic S Resnic; Michael E Ring; John S Rumsfeld; Marc E Shelton; Michael C Simanowith; Lara E Slattery; William S Weintraub; Ann Lovett; Sharon-Lise Normand Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2015-11-18 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Ashwin S Nathan; Swathi Raman; Nancy Yang; Ian Painter; Sameed Ahmed M Khatana; Elias J Dayoub; Howard C Herrmann; Robert W Yeh; Peter W Groeneveld; Jacob A Doll; James M McCabe; Ravi S Hira; Jay Giri; Alexander C Fanaroff Journal: Circ Cardiovasc Interv Date: 2020-09-04 Impact factor: 6.546