Literature DB >> 24899678

Change in hospital-level use of transradial percutaneous coronary intervention and periprocedural outcomes: insights from the national cardiovascular data registry.

Steven M Bradley1, Sunil V Rao2, Jeptha P Curtis2, Craig S Parzynski2, John C Messenger2, Stacie L Daugherty2, John S Rumsfeld2, Hitinder S Gurm2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Whether increasing use of radial access has improved percutaneous coronary intervention outcomes remains unknown. We sought to determine the relationship between increasing facility-level use of transradial percutaneous coronary intervention (TRI) and periprocedural outcomes. METHODS AND
RESULTS: Within the National Cardiovascular Data Registry CathPCI Registry, we estimated the risk-adjusted association between hospital category of change in TRI use (during the 3-year period from 2009 to 2012) and trends in access site and overall bleeding, fluoroscopy time, and contrast use among 818 facilities with low baseline TRI use. There were 4 categories of hospital change in TRI use: very low (baseline, 0.2% increasing to 1.8% at the end of 3 years), low (0.9% increasing to 8.9%), moderate (1.6% increasing to 27.2%), and high (1.0% increasing to 45.1%). Risk-adjusted access site bleeding decreased over time for all hospital categories; however, the rate of decline varied across hospital categories (P for interaction, <0.001). The decrease in access site bleeding was significantly greater for hospitals with moderate or high increases in TRI use (relative risk, 0.45, 95% confidence interval, 0.36-0.56) when compared with that of very low or low hospitals (relative risk, 0.65; 95% confidence interval, 0.58-0.74; P for comparison, 0.002). Similar findings were observed for overall bleeding. An increase in fluoroscopy time (≈1.3 minutes) was noted at hospitals with moderate and high use of TRI (P=0.01). Trends in contrast use were similar across hospital categories.
CONCLUSIONS: In a national sample of hospitals performing percutaneous coronary intervention, bleeding rates decreased over time for all hospital categories of change in TRI use. The decline in bleeding outcomes was larger at hospitals with increased adoption of TRI when compared with hospitals with minimal or no change in TRI use.
© 2014 American Heart Association, Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  hemorrhage; hospitals; outcomes assessment; percutaneous coronary intervention

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24899678      PMCID: PMC5173329          DOI: 10.1161/CIRCOUTCOMES.114.001020

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes        ISSN: 1941-7713


  30 in total

1.  The American College of Cardiology-National Cardiovascular Data Registry (ACC-NCDR): building a national clinical data repository.

Authors:  R G Brindis; S Fitzgerald; H V Anderson; R E Shaw; W S Weintraub; J F Williams
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2001-06-15       Impact factor: 24.094

2.  Temporal trends in and factors associated with bleeding complications among patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: a report from the National Cardiovascular Data CathPCI Registry.

Authors:  Sumeet Subherwal; Eric D Peterson; David Dai; Laine Thomas; John C Messenger; Ying Xian; Ralph G Brindis; Dmitriy N Feldman; Shaun Senter; Lloyd W Klein; Steven P Marso; Matthew T Roe; Sunil V Rao
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2012-05-22       Impact factor: 24.094

Review 3.  Bleeding, blood transfusion, and increased mortality after percutaneous coronary intervention: implications for contemporary practice.

Authors:  Brendan J Doyle; Charanjit S Rihal; Dennis A Gastineau; David R Holmes
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2009-06-02       Impact factor: 24.094

4.  The American College of Cardiology National Database: progress and challenges. American College of Cardiology Database Committee.

Authors:  W S Weintraub; C R McKay; R N Riner; S G Ellis; P L Frommer; D B Carmichael; K E Hammermeister; M N Effros; J E Bost; D P Bodycombe
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  1997-02       Impact factor: 24.094

5.  What distinguishes top-performing hospitals in acute myocardial infarction mortality rates? A qualitative study.

Authors:  Leslie A Curry; Erica Spatz; Emily Cherlin; Jennifer W Thompson; David Berg; Henry H Ting; Carole Decker; Harlan M Krumholz; Elizabeth H Bradley
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2011-03-15       Impact factor: 25.391

6.  Radial versus femoral access for coronary angiography and intervention in patients with acute coronary syndromes (RIVAL): a randomised, parallel group, multicentre trial.

Authors:  Sanjit S Jolly; Salim Yusuf; John Cairns; Kari Niemelä; Denis Xavier; Petr Widimsky; Andrzej Budaj; Matti Niemelä; Vicent Valentin; Basil S Lewis; Alvaro Avezum; Philippe Gabriel Steg; Sunil V Rao; Peggy Gao; Rizwan Afzal; Campbell D Joyner; Susan Chrolavicius; Shamir R Mehta
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2011-04-04       Impact factor: 79.321

7.  Impact of automated contrast injector systems on contrast use and contrast-associated complications in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary interventions.

Authors:  Hitinder S Gurm; Dean Smith; David Share; David Wohns; John Collins; Mohan Madala; Srinivas Koneru; Dan Menees; Stanley Chetcuti
Journal:  JACC Cardiovasc Interv       Date:  2013-03-20       Impact factor: 11.195

8.  Adoption of radial access and comparison of outcomes to femoral access in percutaneous coronary intervention: an updated report from the national cardiovascular data registry (2007-2012).

Authors:  Dmitriy N Feldman; Rajesh V Swaminathan; Lisa A Kaltenbach; Dmitri V Baklanov; Luke K Kim; S Chiu Wong; Robert M Minutello; John C Messenger; Issam Moussa; Kirk N Garratt; Robert N Piana; William B Hillegass; Mauricio G Cohen; Ian C Gilchrist; Sunil V Rao
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2013-06-11       Impact factor: 29.690

9.  A contemporary view of diagnostic cardiac catheterization and percutaneous coronary intervention in the United States: a report from the CathPCI Registry of the National Cardiovascular Data Registry, 2010 through June 2011.

Authors:  Gregory J Dehmer; Douglas Weaver; Matthew T Roe; Sarah Milford-Beland; Susan Fitzgerald; Anthony Hermann; John Messenger; Issam Moussa; Kirk Garratt; John Rumsfeld; Ralph G Brindis
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2012-10-17       Impact factor: 24.094

10.  Effect of radial versus femoral access on radiation dose and the importance of procedural volume: a substudy of the multicenter randomized RIVAL trial.

Authors:  Sanjit S Jolly; John Cairns; Kari Niemela; Philippe Gabriel Steg; Madhu K Natarajan; Asim N Cheema; Sunil V Rao; Warren J Cantor; Vladimír Džavík; Andrzej Budaj; Tej Sheth; Vicent Valentin; Anthony Fung; Petr Widimsky; Emile Ferrari; Peggy Gao; Barbara Jedrzejowski; Shamir R Mehta
Journal:  JACC Cardiovasc Interv       Date:  2013-03       Impact factor: 11.195

View more
  6 in total

Review 1.  The Value of Transradial: Impact on Patient Satisfaction and Health Care Economics.

Authors:  Samuel M Lindner; Christian A McNeely; Amit P Amin
Journal:  Interv Cardiol Clin       Date:  2020-01

2.  Radial versus femoral access site for percutaneous coronary intervention in patients suffering acute myocardial infarction : A randomized prospective multicenter trial.

Authors:  Christiana Schernthaner; Matthias Hammerer; Stefan Harb; Matthias Heigert; Kurt Hoellinger; Elisabeth Lassnig; Edwin Maurer; Jochen Schuler; Peter Siostrzonek; Hanno Ulmer; Andreas Winter; Johann Altenberger
Journal:  Wien Klin Wochenschr       Date:  2017-09-12       Impact factor: 1.704

3.  Appropriate Use Criteria for Coronary Revascularization and Trends in Utilization, Patient Selection, and Appropriateness of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention.

Authors:  Nihar R Desai; Steven M Bradley; Craig S Parzynski; Brahmajee K Nallamothu; Paul S Chan; John A Spertus; Manesh R Patel; Jeremy Ader; Aaron Soufer; Harlan M Krumholz; Jeptha P Curtis
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2015-11-17       Impact factor: 56.272

4.  Transradial versus transfemoral access for cardiac catheterization: a nationwide pilot study of training preferences and expertise in The United States.

Authors:  Khalid Changal; Mubbasher Ameer Syed; Ealla Atari; Salik Nazir; Sameer Saleem; Sajjad Gul; F N U Salman; Asad Inayat; Ehab Eltahawy
Journal:  BMC Cardiovasc Disord       Date:  2021-05-21       Impact factor: 2.298

5.  Radial Approach Expertise and Clinical Outcomes of Percutanous Coronary Interventions Performed Using Femoral Approach.

Authors:  Tomasz Tokarek; Artur Dziewierz; Krzysztof Plens; Tomasz Rakowski; Michał Zabojszcz; Dariusz Dudek; Zbigniew Siudak
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2019-09-18       Impact factor: 4.241

6.  Radial or femoral access in primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI): Does the choice matters?

Authors:  Mahesh Kumar Batra; Lajpat Rai; Naveed Ullah Khan; Muhammad Naeem Mengal; Sanam Khowaja; Syed Nadeem Hassan Rizvi; Tahir Saghir; Nadeem Qamar; Jawaid Akbar Sial; Musa Karim
Journal:  Indian Heart J       Date:  2020-05-21
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.