Circulation. Cardiovascular interventions · 2021
Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Following Diagnostic Angiography by Noninterventional Versus Interventional Cardiologists: Insights From the CathPCI Registry.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Lima Fabio V, Manandhar Pratik, Wojdyla Daniel, Wang Tracy, Aronow Herbert D, Kadiyala Vishnu, Weissler E Hope, Madan Nidhi, Gilchrist Ian C, Grines Cindy, Abbott J Dawn
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: There are limited contemporary, national data describing diagnostic cardiac catheterization with subsequent percutaneous coronary intervention (ad hoc percutaneous coronary intervention [PCI]) performed by an invasive-diagnostic and interventional (Dx/IC) operator team versus solo interventional operator (solo-IC). Using the CathPCI Registry, this study aimed at analyzing trends and outcomes in ad hoc PCI among Dx/IC versus solo-IC operators.
METHODS: Quarterly rates (January 2012 to March 2018) of ad hoc PCI cases by Dx/IC and solo-IC operators were obtained. Odds of inhospital major adverse cardiovascular events, net adverse cardiovascular events (ie, composite major adverse cardiovascular event+bleeding), and rarely appropriate PCI were estimated using multivariable regression.
RESULTS: From 1077 sites, 1 262 948 patients were included. The number of invasive-diagnostic operators and cases performed by Dx/IC teams decreased from nearly 9% to 5% during the study period. Patients treated by Dx/IC teams were more often White and had fewer comorbidities compared with patients treated by solo-IC operators. Considerable variation existed across sites, and over two-fifths of sites had 0% ad hoc PCI performed by Dx/IC. In adjusted analyses, ad hoc performed by Dx/IC had similar risks of major adverse cardiovascular event (OR, 1.04 [95% CI, 0.97-1.11]) and net adverse cardiovascular events (OR, 0.98 [95% CI, 0.94-1.03]) compared with solo-IC. Rarely appropriate PCI, although low overall (2.1% versus 1.9%) occurred more often by Dx/IC compared with solo-IC (OR, 1.20 [95% CI, 1.13-1.26]).
CONCLUSIONS: Contemporary, nationwide data from the CathPCI Registry demonstrates the number of Dx/IC operator teams and cases has decreased but that case volume is stable among operators. Outcomes were independent of operator type, which supports current practice patterns. The finding of a higher risk of rarely appropriate PCI in Dx/IC teams should be further studied.
METHODS: Quarterly rates (January 2012 to March 2018) of ad hoc PCI cases by Dx/IC and solo-IC operators were obtained. Odds of inhospital major adverse cardiovascular events, net adverse cardiovascular events (ie, composite major adverse cardiovascular event+bleeding), and rarely appropriate PCI were estimated using multivariable regression.
RESULTS: From 1077 sites, 1 262 948 patients were included. The number of invasive-diagnostic operators and cases performed by Dx/IC teams decreased from nearly 9% to 5% during the study period. Patients treated by Dx/IC teams were more often White and had fewer comorbidities compared with patients treated by solo-IC operators. Considerable variation existed across sites, and over two-fifths of sites had 0% ad hoc PCI performed by Dx/IC. In adjusted analyses, ad hoc performed by Dx/IC had similar risks of major adverse cardiovascular event (OR, 1.04 [95% CI, 0.97-1.11]) and net adverse cardiovascular events (OR, 0.98 [95% CI, 0.94-1.03]) compared with solo-IC. Rarely appropriate PCI, although low overall (2.1% versus 1.9%) occurred more often by Dx/IC compared with solo-IC (OR, 1.20 [95% CI, 1.13-1.26]).
CONCLUSIONS: Contemporary, nationwide data from the CathPCI Registry demonstrates the number of Dx/IC operator teams and cases has decreased but that case volume is stable among operators. Outcomes were independent of operator type, which supports current practice patterns. The finding of a higher risk of rarely appropriate PCI in Dx/IC teams should be further studied.