ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Quantitative flow ratio (QFR) and myocardial perfusion scintigraphy (MPS) are utilized for assessing coronary artery disease (CAD) significance. We aimed to analyze their concordance and prognostic impact. AIMS: We aimed to analyze the concordance between QFR and MPS and their risk stratification. METHODS: Patients with invasive coronary angiography and MPS were categorized as concordant if QFR ≤ 0.80 and summed difference score (SDS) ≥ 4 or if QFR > 0.80 and SDS < 4; otherwise, they were discordant. Concordance was classified by coronary territory involvement: total (three territories), partial (two territories), poor (one territory), and total discordance (zero territories). Leaman score assessed coronary atherosclerotic burden. RESULTS: 2010 coronary territories (670 patients) underwent joint QFR and MPS analysis. MPS area under the curve for QFR ≤ 0.80 was 0.637. Concordance rates were total (52.5%), partial (29.1%), poor (15.8%), and total discordance (2.6%). Most concordance occurred in patients without significant CAD or with single-vessel disease (89.5%), particularly without MPS perfusion defects (91.5%). Leaman score (odds ratio [OR]: 0.839, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.805-0.875, p < 0.001) and MPS perfusion defect (summed stress score [SSS] ≥ 4) (OR: 0.355, 95% CI: 0.211-0.596, p < 0.001) were independent predictors for discordance. After 1400 days, no significant difference in death/myocardial infarction was observed based on MPS assessment, but Leaman score, functional Leaman score, and average QFR identified higher risk patients. CONCLUSIONS: MPS showed good overall accuracy in assessing QFR significance but substantial discordance existed. Predictors for discordance included higher atherosclerotic burden and MPS perfusion defects (SSS ≥ 4). Leaman score, QFR-based functional Leaman score, and average QFR provided better risk stratification for all-cause death and myocardial infarction than MPS.
Subject(s)
Coronary Angiography , Coronary Artery Disease , Coronary Vessels , Myocardial Perfusion Imaging , Predictive Value of Tests , Humans , Myocardial Perfusion Imaging/methods , Female , Male , Coronary Artery Disease/diagnostic imaging , Coronary Artery Disease/physiopathology , Coronary Artery Disease/mortality , Middle Aged , Aged , Coronary Vessels/diagnostic imaging , Coronary Vessels/physiopathology , Prognosis , Retrospective Studies , Risk Assessment , Risk Factors , Reproducibility of Results , Coronary Circulation , Severity of Illness Index , Tomography, Emission-Computed, Single-Photon , Fractional Flow Reserve, Myocardial , Time FactorsABSTRACT
Apesar de a alta hospitalar no mesmo dia (AHMD) após intervenção coronária percutânea(ICP) eletiva não complicada ser adotada mundialmente, ela permanece pouco estudada em nosso meio.Objetivamos, assim, avaliar nossa experiência inicial com a AHMD após ICP eletiva, em relação à suas egurança e aos preditores de sucesso. Métodos: Foram incluídos 161 pacientes consecutivos para AHMD, de único centro, selecionados em ambulatório especializado. Para a identificação dos fatores associados ao sucesso da AHMD, foram ajustados modelos de regressão logística simples e múltipla. Resultados: A AHMD foi realizada com sucesso em 114 pacientes (70,8%), tendo os 47 pacientes restantes permanecido internados (45 com alta na manhã seguinte e 2 pacientes após 2 dias). Nenhum paciente com AHMD apresentou evento cardíaco adverso maior ou complicação vascular importante aos 30 dias e no seguimento mediano de 12 meses. No grupo internação, ocorreu apenas um caso de infarto agudo do miocárdio por oclusão de ramo lateral e dois hematomas > 5 cm relacionados ao sítio de punção. Os preditores de sucesso da AHMD foram: via de acesso radial (OR = 5,92; IC95% 1,73-20,21; p = 0,005), presença de lesões tipo A/B1 (OR = 14,09; IC95% 1,70-116,49; p = 0,01) e volume de contraste (OR = 0,76;IC95% 0,65-0,88; p < 0,001). Conclusões: A AHMD foi segura e pôde ser realizada com sucesso na maioria dos pacientes selecionados para ICP eletiva, sendo seus preditores de sucesso o acesso radial, as lesões menos complexas e um volume menor de contraste...
Background: Although same-day discharge (SDD) after elective uncomplicated percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) be adopted worldwide, it remains poorly studied in our country. We aim to evaluate our initial experience with SDD after elective PCI, regarding its safety and predictors of success. Methods: A hundred and sixty-one single-center consecutive patients, selected in a specialized out patient clinic, were included for SDD. To identify the factors associated with SDD, single and multiple logistic regression models were adjusted. Results: SDD was successfully performed in 114 patients (70.8%) and the remaining 47 patients remained hospitalized (45 with discharge in the following morning and 2 patients after 2 days). No patient with SDD presented major adverse cardiac events or major vascular complications at 30 days or at a median follow-up of 12 months. In the inpatient group, there was only one case of acute myocardial infarction due to a lateral branch occlusion and two patients with > 5 cm hematoma related to the access site. The SDD predictors were radial access route (OR = 5.92; 95%CI 1.73-20.21; p = 0.005), presence of type A/B1 lesions(OR = 14.09; 95%CI 1.70-116.49%; p = 0.01) and contrast volume (OR = 0.76; 95%CI 0.65-0.88; p < 0.001). Conclusions: SDD was safe and could be successfully performed in most patients selected for elective PCI, and its predictors were the radial access, less complex coronary lesions and a and lower contrast volume...
Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Female , Middle Aged , Patient Discharge/trends , Angioplasty/methods , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention/methods , Elective Surgical Procedures/methods , Data Interpretation, Statistical , Analysis of Variance , Femoral Artery , Radial Artery , Cardiovascular Diseases/complications , Cardiovascular Diseases/diagnosis , StentsABSTRACT
Introdução: A intervenção coronária percutânea (ICP) por via radial ainda é pouco utilizada em nosso meio. O objetivo do presente estudo foi avaliar a prevalência e os resultados da ICP por via radial, comparada à via femoral, em uma população do mundo real. Métodos: Registro unicêntrico, com 507 pacientes consecutivos submetidos a ICP pelas vias radial (n = 121) e femoral (n = 386), de acordo com a escolha do operador. Resultados: Os pacientes que utilizaram a via radial (23,9%) eram mais frequentemente do sexo masculino (78,5% vs. 69,9%; P = 0,07) e tabagistas (19,8% vs. 11,7%; P = 0,02), com maior prevalência de lesões uniarteriais (59,5% vs. 46,4%), tipo A/B1 (39% vs. 28,4%) e com função ventricular preservada (87,1% vs. 73%; P < 0,01). Nesse grupo foram utilizados stents de maior diâmetro e menor comprimento. O sucesso do procedimento foi elevado (97,3% vs. 96,3%; P = 0,56) e a incidência de óbito foi baixa, não diferindo entre os grupos (0,8% vs. 0,8%; P = 0,96), assim como as taxas de infarto do miocárdio (2,5% vs. 2,1%; P = 0,73). Não ocorreram revascularizações do vaso-alvo de urgência. Os pacientes tratados pela via radial permaneceram menos tempo internados (1 dia vs. 2 dias; P = 0,02) e não apresentaram complicações vasculares (0 vs. 3,4%; P = 0,045). Conclusões: A utilização da ICP por via radial representa o dobro da média nacional na instituição em que o estudo foi realizado, e a escolha de pacientes para essa técnica trouxe resultados do procedimento equivalentes aos da via femoral, nenhuma complicação vascular, e reduziu à metade o tempo de internação hospitalar.
BACKGROUND: In our country radial access is still underused in percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI). The objective of this study was to evaluate the prevalence and compare radial to femoral vascular access for PCI in a real-world population. METHODS: Single center registry, with 507 consecutive patients undergoing PCI by radial (n = 121) and femoral (n = 386) access, according to the operator's choice. RESULTS: Patients using radial access (23.9%) were more often male (78.5% vs. 69.9%; P = 0.07) and smokers (19.8% vs. 11.7%; P = 0.02), had a higher prevalence of single-vessel disease (59.5% vs. 46.4%), type A/B1 (39% vs. 28.4%) lesions and had preserved ventricular function (87.1% vs. 73%; P < 0.01). Larger diameter and shorter stents were used in this group. Procedure success was high (97.3% vs. 96.3%; P = 0.56), the incidence of death was low and was not different between groups (0.8% vs. 0.8%; P = 0.96), as well as myocardial infarction rates (2.5% vs. 2.1%; P = 0.73). There were no urgent target-vessel revascularizations. Patients treated by the radial approach had a shorter hospitalization period (1 day vs. 2 days; P = 0.02) and did not have vascular complications (0 vs. 3.4%; P = 0.045). CONCLUSIONS: The use of radial access for PCI in our institution is twice the national average and the choice of patients for this technique provided similar results to those obtained by the femoral approach, no vascular complications and halved patients' average stay in hospital.
