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.
Cardiovasc Revasc Med ; 21(12): 1489-1492, 2020 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32448777

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Drug eluting stents (DES) are used in the majority of patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Factors associated with the use of bare metal stents (BMS) for patients undergoing primary PCI for ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) have not been adequately explored. The objective of this study was to evaluate factors associated with BMS use in STEMI patients undergoing primary PCI. METHODS: Patients undergoing primary PCI for STEMI between January 2008 and February 2015 were retrospectively identified. Patients who received both a DES and BMS were included in the DES group and patients receiving balloon angioplasty only were excluded. Baseline demographics, angiographic variables, procedure related variables and in-hospital events were collected. Multivariate analysis was performed to identify factors associated with BMS use. RESULTS: Eight hundred and sixty-five patients underwent primary PCI for STEMI during the study period. Seventy-two patients (8.3%) received balloon angioplasty only and were excluded, yielding 793 patients for the study cohort. Three hundred fifty-two patients (44%) received BMS and 441 patients (56%) received DES. Patients receiving DES had a higher prevalence of diabetes mellitus, prior myocardial infarction, prior PCI, left anterior descending artery culprit location and Medicaid Insurance compared to those receiving BMS. Patients receiving BMS had a higher prevalence of cardiogenic shock and right coronary artery culprit location. Unadjusted in-hospital mortality was significantly higher for patients receiving BMS compared to patients receiving DES, 11.1% vs 3.2%, respectively, p < 0.0001. Multivariate predictors of BMS use were cardiogenic shock (OR 30.3; 95% CI 11.25 to 81.73) and diabetes mellitus (OR 2.99; 95% CI 1.04 to 8.64). CONCLUSION: In a contemporary series of patients undergoing primary PCI for STEMI, BMS were used in 44% of patients and independent factors associated with BMS use were cardiogenic shock and diabetes mellitus.


Subject(s)
Percutaneous Coronary Intervention , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction , Drug-Eluting Stents , Humans , Retrospective Studies , Treatment Outcome
2.
J Invasive Cardiol ; 30(10): 367-371, 2018 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30279292

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Patients with massive and submassive pulmonary embolism (PE) require rapid identification, triage, and consideration for reperfusion therapy. Use of an existing ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) team and activation protocol may be an effective means to care for these patients. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this analysis was to evaluate a pilot study using the STEMI team and a dedicated PE protocol for treatment of patients with massive and submassive PE. METHODS: From June 2014 to April 2016, a total of 40 patients with massive and submassive PE were evaluated. Baseline demographics, mode of hospital entry (transfer-in, in-hospital, and emergency department [ED] arrival), treatment time intervals (door to computed tomography PE protocol [CTPE], CTPE to invasive pulmonary angiogram, door to treatment time), procedures performed, and in-hospital clinical events were collected. RESULTS: Mean age was 56 ± 14 years, 17 (42%) were male, and 12 (30%) had a prior history of deep venous thrombosis or PE. Twenty-three patients (57%) had massive PE and 17 patients (43%) had submassive PE. Mode of hospital entry was transfer-in (38%), in-hospital (20%), and ED arrival (42%). Four patients (10%) presented with cardiac arrest, 8 patients (20%) required intubation, and 5 patients (12%) required extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. Ten patients (25%) received anticoagulation therapy or placement of inferior vena cava filter, 3 patients (7.5%) received diagnostic pulmonary angiography alone, and 27 patients (67.5%) received endovascular treatment. For patients arriving via the ED, door to CTPE was 4.9 ± 3.6 hours, CTPE to diagnostic pulmonary angiography was 7.8 ± 8.5 hours, and door to treatment time was 10.2 ± 9.0 hours. Endovascular devices utilized included combinations of rheolytic and other thrombectomy devices as well as catheter-directed fibrinolysis. Length of hospital stay was 15 ± 15 days and in-hospital survival rate was 90%. CONCLUSIONS: Use of an existing STEMI team and activation protocol is a feasible method to care for patients with massive and submassive PE. This pilot study demonstrated rapid treatment times with low in-hospital mortality.


Subject(s)
Cardiologists , Patient Care Team , Pulmonary Embolism/therapy , Thrombectomy/methods , Emergency Service, Hospital , Female , Fibrinolytic Agents/therapeutic use , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Pilot Projects , Retrospective Studies , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction , Thrombolytic Therapy/methods
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...