A Total of 1,007 Percutaneous Coronary Interventions Without Onsite Cardiac Surgery. Acute and Long-Term Outcomes

Journal of the American College of Cardiology

Volumn 47, Issue 8, 2006, Pages 1713-1721

  Ting, Henry H ^a   Raveendran, Ganesh ^a   Lennon, Ryan J ^a   Long, Kirsten Hall ^a   Singh, Mandeep ^a   Wood, Douglas L ^a   Gersh, Bernard J ^a   Rihal, Charanjit S ^a   Holmes Jr , David R ^a  

^a MAYO CLINIC   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CAUSE OF DEATH; COMMUNITY HOSPITAL; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CONTROLLED STUDY; CORONARY ARTERY BYPASS GRAFT; EMERGENCY SURGERY; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HEART INFARCTION; HEART SURGERY; HUMAN; MALE; PERCUTANEOUS CORONARY INTERVENTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; Q WAVE; ST SEGMENT ELEVATION; SURVIVAL; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

AGED; ANGIOPLASTY, TRANSLUMINAL, PERCUTANEOUS CORONARY; COHORT STUDIES; ELECTROCARDIOGRAPHY; FEMALE; HOSPITALS, COMMUNITY; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MYOCARDIAL INFARCTION; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; SURGERY DEPARTMENT, HOSPITAL; TIME FACTORS; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 33646023161     PISSN: 07351097     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2006.02.039     Document Type: Article

References (42)

1. Smith S.C., Feldman T.E., Hirshfeld J.W., et al. ACC/AHA/SCAI 2005 guideline update for percutaneous coronary intervention. J Am Coll Cardiol 47 (2006) 216-235
2. Anderson H.V., Shaw R.E., Brindis R.G., et al., The American College of Cardiology-National Cardiovascular Data Registry. A contemporary overview of percutaneous coronary interventions. J Am Coll Cardiol 39 (2002) 1096-1103
3. Hannan E.L., Racz M.J., Walford F., et al. Long-term outcomes of coronary artery bypass grafting versus stent implantation. N Engl J Med 352 (2005) 2174-2183
4. McGrath P.D., Wennberg D.E., Dickens Jr. J.D., et al. Relation between operator and hospital volume and outcomes following percutaneous coronary interventions in the era of the coronary stent. JAMA 284 (2000) 3139-3144
5. Yang E.H., Gumina R.J., Lennon R.J., et al. Emergency coronary artery bypass surgery for percutaneous coronary interventions. J Am Coll Cardiol 46 (2005) 2004-2009
6. Seshadri N., Whitlow P.L., Acharya N., et al. Emergency coronary artery bypass surgery in the contemporary percutaneous coronary intervention era. Circulation 106 (2002) 2346-2350
7. Lofti M., Mackie K., Dzavik V., and Seidelin P.H. Impact of delays to cardiac surgery after failed angioplasty and stenting. J Am Coll Cardiol 43 (2004) 337-342
8. Klinke W.P., and Hui W. Percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty without onsite surgical facilities. Am J Cardiol 70 (1992) 1520-1525
9. Meier B., Urban P., Dorsaz P.A., and Favre J. Surgical standby for coronary balloon angioplasty. JAMA 268 (1992) 741-745
10. Iniguez A., Macaya C., Hernandez R., et al. Comparison of results of percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty with and without selective requirement of surgical standby. Am J Cardiol 69 (1992) 1161-1165
11. Sowton E., de Bono D., Gribbin B., et al. Coronary angioplasty in the United Kingdom. Br Heart J 66 (1991) 325-331
12. Loubeyre C., Morice M.C., Berzin B., et al. Emergency coronary artery bypass surgery following coronary angioplasty and stenting. results of a French multicenter registry. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 47 (1999) 441-448
13. Vogt A., Bonzel T., Harmjanz D., et al. Percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty registry of German community hospitals. Eur Heart J 18 (1997) 1110-1114
14. Dellavalle A., Steffinino G., Ribichini F., et al. Elective coronary angioplasty with and without surgical standby. clinical and angiographic criteria for the selection of patients. Coron Artery Dis 6 (1995) 513-520
15. Zavala-Alarcon E., Cecena F., Ashar R., et al. Safety of elective-including "high risk"-percutaneous coronary interventions without on-site cardiac surgery. Am Heart J 148 (2004) 676-683
16. Richardson S.G., Morton P., Murtagh J.G., et al. Management of acute coronary occlusion during percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty. experience of complications in a hospital without onsite facilities for cardiac surgery. BMJ 300 (1990) 355-358
17. Wharton Jr. T.P., Grines L.L., Turco M.A., et al. Primary angioplasty in acute myocardial infarction at hospitals with no surgery on-site (the PAMI-No SOS study) versus transfer to surgical centers for primary angioplasty. J Am Coll Cardiol 43 (2004) 1943-1950
18. Rush Jr. J.E., Thompson S., and Ciuffo A.A. Retrospective comparison of a strategy of primary coronary angioplasty versus intravenous thrombolytic therapy for acute myocardial infarction in a community hospital without surgical backup. J Invasive Cardiol 8 (1996) 91-98
19. Smyth D.W., Richards A.M., and Elliott J.M. Direct angioplasty for myocardial infarction. one-year experience in a center with surgical back-up 220 miles away. J Invasive Cardiol 9 (1997) 324-332
20. Wharton Jr. T.P., McNamara N.S., Fedele F.A., et al. Primary angioplasty for the treatment of acute myocardial infarction. Experience at two community hospitals without cardiac surgery. J Am Coll Cardiol 33 (1999) 1257-1265
21. Iannone L.A., Anderson S.M., and Phillips S.J. Coronary angioplasty for acute myocardial infarction in a hospital without cardiac surgery. Tex Heart Inst J 20 (1993) 99-104
22. Vogel J.H. Angioplasty in the patient with an evolving myocardial infarction. with and without surgical backup. Clin Cardiol 15 (1992) 880-882
23. Weaver W.D., Litwin P.E., and Martin J.S. Use of direct angioplasty for treatment of patients with acute myocardial infarction in hospitals with and without on-site cardiac surgery. The Myocardial Infarction, Triage, and Intervention Project Investigators. Circulation 88 (1993) 2067-2075
24. Aversano T., Aversano L.T., Passamani E., et al. Thrombolytic therapy versus primary percutaneous coronary intervention for myocardial infarction in patients presenting to hospitals without on-site cardiac surgery. a randomized controlled trial. JAMA 287 (2002) 1943-1951
25. Kerensky R.A., Cusma J.T., Kubilis P., et al. ACC/European Society of Cardiology international study of angiographic data compression phase I. the effect of Lossy data compression on recognition of diagnostic features in digital coronary angiography. J Am Coll Cardiol 35 (2000) 1370-1379
26. Hasdai D., Garratt K.N., Grill D.E., et al. Effect of smoking status on the long-term outcome after successful percutaneous coronary revascularization. N Engl J Med 336 (1997) 755-761
27. Singh M., Lennon R.J., Holmes D.R., et al. Correlates of procedural complications and a simple integer risk score for percutaneous coronary intervention. J Am Coll Cardiol 40 (2002) 387-393
28. Rosenbaum P.R. Optimal matching for observational studies. J Am Stat Assoc 84 (1989) 1024-1032
29. D'Agostino Jr. R.B. Propensity score methods for bias reduction in the comparison of a treatment to a non-randomized control group. Stat Med 17 (1998) 2265-2281
30. Kansagra S.M., Curtis L.H., and Schulman K.A. Regionalization of percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty and implications for patient travel distance. JAMA 292 (2004) 1717-1723
31. Weaver W.D. Is onsite surgery backup necessary for percutaneous coronary interventions. JAMA 292 (2004) 2014-2016
32. Wharton Jr. T.P. Should patients with acute myocardial infarction be transferred to a tertiary center for primary angioplasty or receive it at qualified hospitals in the community. the case for community hospital angioplasty. Circulation 112 (2005) 3509-3534
33. Keeley E.C., and Grines C.L. Should patients with acute myocardial infarction be transferred to a tertiary center for primary angioplasty or receive it at qualified hospitals in the community. the case for emergency transfer for primary percutaneous coronary intervention. Circulation 112 (2005) 3509-3534
34. Bittl J.A. Reducing the risk of emergency bypass surgery for failed percutaneous coronary interventions. J Am Coll Cardiol 46 (2005) 2010-2012
35. Wennberg D.E., Lucas F.L., Siewers A.E., et al. Outcomes of percutaneous coronary interventions performed at centers without and with onsite coronary artery bypass graft surgery. JAMA 292 (2004) 1961-1968
36. Kimmel S.E., Berlin J.A., and Laskey W.K. The relationship between coronary angioplasty procedure volume and major complications. JAMA 274 (1995) 1137-1142
37. Hannan E.L., Wu C., Wallford G., et al. Volume-outcome relationships for percutaneous coronary interventions in the stent era. Circulation 112 (2005) 1171-1179
38. McGrath P.D., Wennberg D.E., Dickens J.D., et al. Relation between operator and hospital volume and outcomes following percutaneous coronary interventions in the era of the coronary stent. JAMA 284 (2000) 3139-3144
39. Epstein A.J., Rathore S.S., Volpp K.G., and Krumholz H.M. Hospital percutaneous coronary intervention volume and patient mortality, 1998 to 2000. does the evidence support current procedural volume minimums. J Am Coll Cardiol 43 (2004) 1755-1762
40. Moscucci M., Share D., Smith D., et al. Relationship between operator volume and adverse outcome in contemporary percutaneous coronary intervention practice. an analysis of a quality-controlled multicenter percutaneous coronary interventions clinical database. J Am Coll Cardiol 46 (2005) 625-632
41. Magid D.J., Calonge B.N., Rumsfeld J.S., et al. Relation between hospital primary angioplasty volume and mortality for patients with acute myocardial infarction treated with primary angioplasty versus thrombolytic therapy. JAMA 284 (2000) 3131-3138
42. Valiki B.A., Kaplan R., and Brown D.L. Volume-outcome relations for physicians and hospitals performing angioplasty for acute myocardial infarction in New York State. Circulation 104 (2001) 2171-2176