OBJECTIVE: To compare same-day (SD) vs. delayed hospital discharge (DD) after single and multivessel coronary stenting facilitated by femoral closure device in patients with stable angina and low-risk acute coronary syndrome (ACS). METHODS:University of Southern California patients were screened and coronary stenting was performed in 2480 patients. Four hundred ninety-three patients met screening criteria and consented. Four hours after percutaneous coronary intervention, 100 were randomized to SD (n=50) or DD (n=50). Patients were followed for one year; outcomes-, patient satisfaction-, and cost analyses were performed. RESULTS: Groups were well distributed, with similar baseline demographic and angiographic characteristics. Mean age was 58.1±8.8years and 86% were male. Non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction and unstable angina were the clinical presentations in 30% and 44% of the SD and DD groups, respectively (p=0.2). Multivessel stenting was performed in 36% and 30% of SD and DD groups, respectively (p=0.14). At one year, two patients from each group (4%) required unplanned revascularization and one patient in the SD group had a gastrointestinal bleed that required a blood transfusion. Six SD and four DD patients required repeat hospitalization (p=0.74). There were no femoral artery vascular complications in either group. Patient satisfaction scores were equivalent. SD discharge was associated with $1200 savings per patient. CONCLUSIONS:SD discharge after uncomplicated single and multivessel coronary stenting of patients with stable, low-risk ACS, via the femoral approach facilitated by a closure device, is associated with similar clinical outcomes, patient satisfaction, and cost savings compared to overnight (DD) hospital stay.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: To compare same-day (SD) vs. delayed hospital discharge (DD) after single and multivessel coronary stenting facilitated by femoral closure device in patients with stable angina and low-risk acute coronary syndrome (ACS). METHODS: University of Southern Californiapatients were screened and coronary stenting was performed in 2480 patients. Four hundred ninety-three patients met screening criteria and consented. Four hours after percutaneous coronary intervention, 100 were randomized to SD (n=50) or DD (n=50). Patients were followed for one year; outcomes-, patient satisfaction-, and cost analyses were performed. RESULTS: Groups were well distributed, with similar baseline demographic and angiographic characteristics. Mean age was 58.1±8.8years and 86% were male. Non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction and unstable angina were the clinical presentations in 30% and 44% of the SD and DD groups, respectively (p=0.2). Multivessel stenting was performed in 36% and 30% of SD and DD groups, respectively (p=0.14). At one year, two patients from each group (4%) required unplanned revascularization and one patient in the SD group had a gastrointestinal bleed that required a blood transfusion. Six SD and four DDpatients required repeat hospitalization (p=0.74). There were no femoral artery vascular complications in either group. Patient satisfaction scores were equivalent. SD discharge was associated with $1200 savings per patient. CONCLUSIONS:SD discharge after uncomplicated single and multivessel coronary stenting of patients with stable, low-risk ACS, via the femoral approach facilitated by a closure device, is associated with similar clinical outcomes, patient satisfaction, and cost savings compared to overnight (DD) hospital stay.
Authors: Paraskevi Taxiarchi; Evangelos Kontopantelis; Tim Kinnaird; Nick Curzen; Adrian Banning; Peter Ludman; Ahmad Shoaib; Muhammad Rashid; Glen P Martin; Mamas A Mamas Journal: Int J Cardiol Date: 2020-07-30 Impact factor: 4.164