Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
J Invasive Cardiol ; 32(3): E49-E59, 2020 Mar.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32123142

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: We sought to develop a risk score to estimate the risk of major adverse cardiac event (MACE) occurrence during the in-hospital and long-term follow-up periods after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation. METHODS: This score was developed and validated in a single-center database encompassing all consecutive patients treated with DES between 2007 and 2014 (n = 4061). For the development of the score, we analyzed all patients treated between January 2007 and December 2012 (n = 2863) while the validation was conducted in a cohort treated between January 2013 and December 2014 (n = 1198). MACE was defined as the combination of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, and ischemia- driven target-lesion revascularization. Different stratification models were developed for the in-hospital (logistic regression) and late follow-up score (Cox model). RESULTS: In-hospital scores ranged from 0 to 37 points and comprised: (a) age; (b) previous coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG); (c) acute coronary syndrome; (d) peripheral vascular disease; (e) treatment of saphenous vein graft; (f) long lesions; (g) small vessels; (h) multivessel disease; and (i) thrombus. The late scores ranged from 0 to 45 points and comprised: (a) previous CABG; (b) diabetes mellitus; (c) acute coronary syndrome; (d) multivessel disease; (e) small vessels; (f) ejection fraction <40%; and (g) treatment of saphenous vein graft. Patients were stratified into low-risk, moderate-risk, and high-risk groups. Both scores had close to 70% accuracy for predicting MACE. CONCLUSION: The present score was developed and validated based on contemporary models for assessing periprocedural and long-term MACE risk post PCI, throughout the full spectrum of patient risk, and important patient subgroups.


Subject(s)
Coronary Artery Disease , Drug-Eluting Stents , Heart Disease Risk Factors , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention , Coronary Artery Bypass , Coronary Artery Disease/diagnosis , Coronary Artery Disease/surgery , Drug-Eluting Stents/adverse effects , Humans , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention/adverse effects , Treatment Outcome
2.
J Invasive Cardiol ; 29(9): 290-296, 2017 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28623668

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Appropriate use criteria (AUC) for coronary revascularization were developed to deliver high-quality care; however, the prognostic impact of these criteria remains unclear. We sought to assess the outcomes of patients treated with second-generation drug-eluting stent (DES) classified according to the updated American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association/Society for Cardiac Angiography and Intervention AUC for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). METHODS: Between January 2012 and December 2013, a total of 1108 consecutive patients treated only with second-generation DES were categorized according to the AUC in three groups, using the new proposed terminology: appropriate ("A"); uncertain ("U"); and inappropriate ("I"). Major adverse cardiac event (MACE, defined as cardiac death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, and ischemia-driven target-lesion revascularization) and stent thrombosis up to 3 years were compared. RESULTS: PCI was categorized as A in 33.8%, U in 46.8%, and I in 19.4% of all cases. PCI-A patients had a higher prevalence of acute coronary syndromes, while PCI-I involved the treatment of more diabetics and patients with stable coronary disease. There were no differences in procedural complications among the three groups, with comparable rates of in-hospital MACE (9.3% for A vs 9.0% for U vs 7.0% for I; P=.70) and 2-year MACE (13.9% for A vs 9.0% for U vs 8.6% for I; P=.40). In the multivariable analysis, AUC classification was not associated with adverse outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: In this contemporary cohort of patients treated with second-generation DES implantation, AUC did not impact 3-year clinical follow-up.


Subject(s)
Coronary Artery Disease/surgery , Drug-Eluting Stents , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention/methods , Aged , Coronary Angiography , Coronary Artery Disease/diagnosis , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Retrospective Studies , Time Factors , Treatment Outcome
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...