Financial impact of coronary stenting in emergency for acute coronary syndromes.

BACKGROUND: Since the prospective payment system, health institutions have only specific payments for the emergency care in the emergency room. The direct urgent admissions in coronary care units for acute coronary syndrome (ACS) do not collect this complementary refund. For the patient's stay, hospital is remunerated with fixed national prices which are similar even in case of emergent or planed coronary revascularization when realized. AIMS: To analyze and compare the financial impact between emergent and planed coronary stenting in the setting of ACS. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This retrospective study was based on patients suffering from ACS who experienced emergent coronary stenting during the year 2005. On 154 patients, 127 were age-, sex- and diagnosis-related group (called "groupe homogène de malades" in the French Health Care system)-matched with 127 suffering from same ACS but with planed "ad hoc" coronary stenting. The overall charges (medical and paramedical team, pharmacy, biology, implantable coronary devices, radiology) were compared between the two groups. RESULTS: Mean stay duration was 6.7 days and did not differ between the two groups. Mean financial retributions were significantly higher in the emergent group (7338 euro [6831-7846] IC95 vs 6509 euro [5994-7023]; p=0,02) but with a much more raised consumption (6810 euro [6283-7336] vs 5223 euro [4632-5814]; p=0,001). This overcost was due especially to drugs and biological expenses. The hospitalization payments did not cover the overall expenses for 25% of the patients' stays (N=64) among whom 39 have had emergent coronary stenting (30.7%, p=0.04). Among the different GHM, the most important difference was observed in non-STEMI without complication with a negative receipts/costs ratio for 37.8% of the stay with coronary stenting in emergency. CONCLUSION: The application of the recent guidelines for coronary revascularization in the management of ACS represents a financial venture for hospital institutions. The engaged charges for emergent coronary stenting are covered with difficulties contrary to planed revascularization.

Comparison of operator radiation exposure with optimized radiation protection devices during coronary angiograms and ad hoc percutaneous coronary interventions by radial and femoral routes.

AIMS: Although underestimated by interventional cardiologists for a long time, radiation exposure of operators and patients is currently a major concern. The objective of the present operator-blinded registry was to compare related-peripheral arterial route radiation exposure of operators. METHODS AND RESULTS: During 420 consecutive coronary angiograms (CAs) and percutaneous coronary interventions (PCIs), four interventional cardiologists were blindly screened. Radiation exposures were assessed using electronic personal dosimeters. Protection of operator was ensured using a lead apron, low leaded flaps, and leaded glass. Radiation exposure of operators was significantly higher using the radial route when compared with the femoral route for both CAs and CAs followed by ad hoc PCIs: 29.0 [1.0-195.0] microSv vs. 13.0 [1.0-164.0] microSv; P < 0.0001 and 69.5 [4.0-531.0] microSv vs. 41.0 [2.0-360.0] microSv; P = 0.018, respectively. Similarly, radiation exposure of patients was significantly higher using the radial route when compared with the femoral route for both CAs and CAs followed by ad hoc PCIs. Moreover, procedural durations and fluoroscopy times were significantly higher throughout the radial route. CONCLUSIONS: Although the radial route decreases peripheral arterial complication rates, increased radiation exposure of operators despite extensive use of specific protection devices is currently a growing problem for the interventional cardiologist health. Radial route indication should be promptly reconsidered in the light of the present findings.

Direct stent implantation without predilatation through 5 French guiding catheter following transfemoral coronary angiogram: a feasibility study.

Direct stenting (DS) is accepted as reducing procedural cost and duration and 5 Fr guiding catheters as lowering peripheral vascular complications. We aimed to evaluate the feasibility and safety of both strategies. We retrospectively studied 150 consecutive patients treated with DS strategy using a 5 Fr femoral approach. A need for 6 Fr devices or balloon predilatation defined 5 Fr DS failure. Procedural success was defined as good angiographic result (residual stenosis < 30% and TIMI flow 3) without ischemic complications. A total of 161 out of 174 lesions were elected as suitable for DS. The success rate of 5 Fr DS was 87.6% (141/161 lesions). The procedural success rate was 92% (138/150 patients). The angiographic success rate was 96.3% (155/161 lesions). Other complications were six non-Q-wave MI and one repeat angioplasty for acute in-stent thrombosis. Only one major peripheral vascular complication occurred. Direct stenting through 5 Fr guiding catheters in selected lesions is safe and effective with a low incidence of peripheral arterial complications.