Literature DB >> 26093878

Effect of access site, gender, and indication on clinical outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention: Insights from the British Cardiovascular Intervention Society (BCIS).

Chun Shing Kwok1, Evangelos Kontopantelis2, Vijay Kunadian3, Simon Anderson1, Karim Ratib4, Mathew Sperrin5, Azfar Zaman5, Peter F Ludman6, Mark A de Belder6, James Nolan4, Mamas A Mamas7.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Gender is a strong predictor of periprocedural major bleeding complications after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). The access site represents an important site of such bleeding complications, which has driven adoption of the transradial access (TRA) use during PCI, although female gender is an independent predictor of transradial PCI failure. This study sought to define gender differences in access site practice and study associations between access site choice and clinical outcomes for PCI over a 6-year period, through the analysis of the British Cardiovascular Intervention Society observational database. METHODS AND
RESULTS: In-hospital major adverse cardiovascular events (a composite of in-hospital mortality and in-hospital myocardial reinfarction and target vessel revascularization), in-hospital bleeding complications, and 30-day mortality were studied based on gender and access site choice (transfemoral access, TRA) in 412,122 patients who underwent PCI between 2007 and 2012 in the United Kingdom. Use of TRA increased in both genders over time, although this lagged behind in women (21% in 2007 to 58% in 2012) compared with men (24% in 2007 to 64% in 2012). In both men and women, TRA was independently associated with a lower in-hospital major adverse cardiovascular event (odds ratio [OR] 0.82, 95% CI 0.76-0.90; OR 0.75, 95% CI 0.66-0.84), in-hospital major bleeding (OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.44-0.66; OR 0.26, 95% CI 0.20-0.33), and 30-day mortality (OR 0.80, 95% CI 0.73-0.89; OR 0.82, 95% CI 0.71-0.94), respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: Where possible, TRA should be considered as the preferred access site choice for PCI, particularly in women in whom the greatest reductions bleeding end points were observed across all indications.
Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26093878     DOI: 10.1016/j.ahj.2015.04.018

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


  9 in total

Review 1.  Vascular Access-Related Complications in Women: Temporal Trends, Emerging Data, and the Current State of Interventional Cardiology Practice.

Authors:  Yohan Chacko; Rushi V Parikh; Jennifer A Tremmel
Journal:  Curr Atheroscler Rep       Date:  2018-06-08       Impact factor: 5.113

2.  Patient Versus Physician Variation in Use of Transradial Percutaneous Coronary Intervention.

Authors:  Shariq Shamim; Fengming Tang; David Safley; Philip Jones; John A Spertus; Dmitri Baklanov
Journal:  Am J Cardiol       Date:  2017-03-30       Impact factor: 2.778

3.  Sex Differences in 1-Year Outcomes After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in the Veterans Health Administration.

Authors:  Melissa M Farmer; Maggie A Stanislawski; Mary E Plomondon; Bevanne Bean-Mayberry; Nataria T Joseph; Lauren E Thompson; Jessica L Zuchowski; Stacie L Daugherty; Elizabeth M Yano; P Michael Ho
Journal:  J Womens Health (Larchmt)       Date:  2017-05-12       Impact factor: 2.681

4.  Safety of the transradial approach to carotid stenting.

Authors:  Young Erben; James F Meschia; Donald V Heck; Fayaz A Shawl; Minerva Mayorga-Carlin; George Howard; Kenneth Rosenfield; John D Sorkin; Thomas G Brott; Brajesh K Lal
Journal:  Catheter Cardiovasc Interv       Date:  2021-08-13       Impact factor: 2.585

5.  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

6.  Patient preference for radial versus femoral vascular access for elective coronary procedures: The PREVAS study.

Authors:  Marlies M Kok; Marieke G M Weernink; Clemens von Birgelen; Anneloes Fens; Liefke C van der Heijden; Janine A van Til
Journal:  Catheter Cardiovasc Interv       Date:  2017-05-04       Impact factor: 2.692

7.  Trends of Sex Differences in Clinical Outcomes After Myocardial Infarction in the United States.

Authors:  Andrija Matetic; Warkaa Shamkhani; Muhammad Rashid; Annabelle Santos Volgman; Harriette G C Van Spall; Thais Coutinho; Laxmi S Mehta; Garima Sharma; Purvi Parwani; Mohamed Osama Mohamed; Mamas A Mamas
Journal:  CJC Open       Date:  2021-07-01

8.  Persistent sex disparities in clinical outcomes with percutaneous coronary intervention: Insights from 6.6 million PCI procedures in the United States.

Authors:  Jessica Potts; Alex Sirker; Sara C Martinez; Martha Gulati; Mirvat Alasnag; Muhammad Rashid; Chun Shing Kwok; Joie Ensor; Danielle L Burke; Richard D Riley; Lene Holmvang; Mamas A Mamas
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-09-04       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  Transradial Versus Transfemoral Approach for Coronary Angiography in Females with Prior Bypass Surgery.

Authors:  Ahmed Amro; Kanaan Mansoor; Mohammad Amro; Hisham Hirzallah; Amal Sobeih; Damir Kusmic; Ziad Abuhelwa; Majd Kanbour; Adee Elhamdani; Obadah Aqtash; Mehiar Elhamdani
Journal:  Cureus       Date:  2020-01-28
  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.