Background Patient selection and outcomes for percutaneous coronary intervention ( PCI ) and coronary artery bypass grafting ( CABG ) have changed over the past decade. However, there is limited information on outcomes for both revascularization strategies in the same population. The study evaluated temporal changes in risk profile, procedural characteristics, and clinical outcomes for PCI‐ and CABG ‐treated patients. Methods and Results We analyzed all PCI and isolated CABG between 2005 and 2017 in nonfederal hospitals in Washington State. Descriptive analysis was performed to evaluate temporal changes in risk profile and, risk‐adjusted in‐hospital mortality. Over the study period, 178 474 PCI and 36 592 CABG procedures were performed. PCI and CABG volume decreased by 2.9% and 22.6%, respectively. Compared with 2005–2009, patients receiving either form of revascularization between 2014 and 2017 had a higher prevalence of comorbidities including diabetes mellitus and hypertension and dialysis. Presentation with ST‐segment–elevation myocardial infarction (17% versus 20%) and cardiogenic shock (2.4% versus 3.4%) increased for patients with PCI compared with CABG. Conversely, clinical acuity decreased for patients receiving CABG over the study period. From 2005 to 2017, mean National Cardiovascular Data Registry Cath PCI mortality score increased for patients treated with PCI (20.1 versus 22.4, P <0.0001) and decreased for patients treated with CABG (18.8 versus 17.8, P <0.0001). Adjusted observed/expected in‐hospital mortality ratio increased for PCI (0.98 versus 1.19, P <0.0001) but decreased for CABG (1.21 versus 0.74, P <0.0001) over the study period. Conclusions Clinical acuity increased for patients treated with PCI rather than CABG . This resulted in an increase in adjusted observed/expected mortality ratio for patients undergoing PCI and a decrease for CABG . These shifts may reflect an increased use of PCI instead of CABG for patients considered to be at high surgical risk.
Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is a minimally invasive procedure to treat severe symptomatic aortic stenosis. While the TAVI procedure can be performed safely and provide excellent 5-year results, little is known about long-term durability. TAVI valves are composed of bioprosthetic leaflets are prone to deterioration, which are categorized as structural valve deterioration (SVD) and non-SVD. SVD refers to an intrinsic pathology of the leaflets or stent structure with mechanisms that include leaflet calcification, leaflet tear, stent fracture, or stent creep. Non-SVD processes include valve thrombosis, infective endocarditis and patient prosthesis mismatch. TAVI valves degenerate by similar mechanisms as bioprosthetic surgical aortic valves. Unique mechanisms that contribute to TAVI degeneration include valve crimpling, balloon expansion, stent under-expansion and valve thrombosis. The absence of a universally accepted definition of SVD poses a challenge in estimating valve durability. Traditional surgical bioprosthetic aortic valves have demonstrated excellent durability with clinically relevant SVD of 6.6% at 10-year follow up. Long-term durability of TAVI valves, however, remain poorly defined. From meta-analysis TAVI trials, SVD was estimated at 7% at 5 years. With iterative improvements in TAVI valve construction and deployment techniques, long-term durability may improve. Until long-term outcomes are better understood, TAVI should be used with caution in younger patients.
A high SAMe-TT2R2 score predicted poor warfarin control and adverse events among atrial fibrillation patients. However, the SAMe-TT2R2 score has not been well validated in venous thromboembolism (VTE) patients. A cohort of 1943 warfarin-treated patients with acute VTE was analyzed to correlate the SAMe-TT2R2 score with time in therapeutic range (TTR) and clinical adverse events. A TTR <60% was more frequent among patients with a high (>2) versus low (0–1) SAMe-TT2R2 score (63.4% vs 52.3%, p<0.0001). A high SAMe-TT2R2 score (>2) correlated with increased overall adverse events (7.9 vs 4.5 overall adverse events/100 patient years, p=0.002), driven primarily by increased recurrent VTE rates (4.2 vs 1.5 recurrent VTE/100 patient years, p=0.0003). The SAMe-TT2R2 score had a modest predictive ability for international normalized ratio (INR) quality and adverse clinical events among warfarin-treated VTE patients. The utility of the SAMe-TT2R2 score to guide clinical decision-making remains to be investigated.
BackgroundNo previous reports have examined the impact of robotic‐assisted (RA) chronic total occlusion (CTO) PCI on procedural duration or safety compared to totally manual CTO PCI.MethodsAmong 95 patients who underwent successful PCI of a single CTO lesion at two centers, 49 (52%) were performed RA and were performed 46 (48%) totally manually. Cockpit time was the time the primary operator entered to robotic cockpit until the procedure was complete. “Theoretical” cockpit time in the control group was time the primary operator would have entered the cockpit after lesion crossing until the procedure was complete. Major adverse events (MAEs) were the composite of death, myocardial infarction, clinical perforation, significant vessel dissection, arrhythmia, acute thrombosis, and stroke.ResultsThe lesion characteristics, procedural time, and contrast dose were similar. All procedures except for one (2%) selected for robotic completion after lesion crossing were completed successfully. The frequency of MAE was similar between groups and there were no in‐hospital deaths. The cockpit time was 8 min longer in RA CTO PCI than the theoretical cockpit time in totally manual CTO PCI (40.6 ± 12.7 vs. 32.1 ± 17.8, p < .01).ConclusionRA CTO PCI was not associated with excess adverse events compared with totally manual CTO PCI and resulted in an average 41 min cockpit time equaling to 48% of procedure time without radiation exposure or requirement for the primary operator to wear a lead apron. Understanding the relationship between cockpit time and reductions in radiation exposure and lead apron‐related orthopedic complications for operators requires future study.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.