Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 20 de 729
Filtrar
Más filtros

Tipo del documento
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
Am J Emerg Med ; 53: 68-72, 2022 03.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34999563

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: Strict control measures under the COVID epidemic have brought an inevitable impact on ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI)'s emergency treatment. We investigated the impact of the COVID on the treatment of patients with STEMI undergoing primary PCI. METHODS: In this single center cohort study, we selected a time frame of 6 month after declaration of COVID-19 infection (Jan 24-July 24, 2020); a group of STEMI patients in the same period of 2019 was used as control. Finally, a total of 246 STEMI patients, who were underwent primary PCI, were enrolled into the study (136 non COVID-19 outbreak periods and 110 COVID-19 outbreak periods). The impact of COVID on the time of symptom onset to the first medical contact (symptom-to-FMC) and door to balloon (D-to-B) was investigated. Moreover, the primary outcome was in-hospital major adverse cardiac events (MACE), defined as a composite of cardiac death, heart failure and malignant arrhythmia. RESULTS: Compared with the same period in 2019, there was a 19% decrease in the total number of STEMI patients undergoing primary PCI at the peak of the pandemic in 2020. The delay in symptom-to-FMC was significantly longer in COVID Outbreak period (180 [68.75, 342] vs 120 [60,240] min, P = 0.003), and the D-to-B times increased significantly (148 [115-190] vs 84 [70-120] min, P < 0.001). However, among patients with STEMI, MACE was similar in both time periods (18.3% vs 25.7%, p = 0.168). On multivariable analysis, COVID was not independently associated with MACE; the history of diabetes, left main disease and age>65 years were the strongest predictors of MACE in the overall population. CONCLUSIONS: The COVID pandemic was not independently associated with MACE; suggesting that active primary PCI treatment preserved high-quality standards even when challenged by a severe epidemic. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: https://ClinicalTrials.gov Unique identifier: NCT04427735.


Asunto(s)
COVID-19/prevención & control , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/estadística & datos numéricos , Infarto del Miocardio con Elevación del ST/terapia , Anciano , Beijing/epidemiología , COVID-19/complicaciones , COVID-19/transmisión , Estudios de Cohortes , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/tendencias , Estudios Retrospectivos , Infarto del Miocardio con Elevación del ST/epidemiología , Factores de Tiempo , Tiempo de Tratamiento/normas , Tiempo de Tratamiento/estadística & datos numéricos , Resultado del Tratamiento
2.
Circulation ; 141(4): 273-284, 2020 01 28.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31735078

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Impella was approved for mechanical circulatory support (MCS) in 2008, but large-scale, real-world data on its use are lacking. Our objective was to describe trends and variations in Impella use, clinical outcomes, and costs across US hospitals in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) treated with MCS (Impella or intra-aortic balloon pump). METHODS: From the Premier Healthcare Database, we analyzed 48 306 patients undergoing PCI with MCS at 432 hospitals between January 2004 and December 2016. Association analyses were performed at 3 levels: time period, hospital, and patient. Hierarchical models with propensity adjustment were used for association analyses. We examined trends and variations in the proportion of Impella use, and associated clinical outcomes (in-hospital mortality, bleeding requiring transfusion, acute kidney injury, stroke, length of stay, and hospital costs). RESULTS: Among patients undergoing PCI treated with MCS, 4782 (9.9%) received Impella; its use increased over time, reaching 31.9% of MCS in 2016. There was wide variation in Impella use across hospitals (>5-fold variation). Specifically, among patients receiving Impella, there was a wide variation in outcomes of bleeding (>2.5-fold variation), and death, acute kidney injury, and stroke (all ≈1.5-fold variation). Adverse outcomes and costs were higher in the Impella era (years 2008-2016) versus the pre-Impella era (years 2004-2007). Hospitals with higher Impella use had higher rates of adverse outcomes and costs. After adjustment for the propensity score, and accounting for clustering of patients by hospitals, Impella use was associated with death: odds ratio, 1.24 (95% CI, 1.13-1.36); bleeding: odds ratio, 1.10 (95% CI, 1.00-1.21); and stroke: odds ratio, 1.34 (95% CI, 1.18-1.53), although a similar, nonsignificant result was observed for acute kidney injury: odds ratio, 1.08 (95% CI, 1.00-1.17). CONCLUSIONS: Impella use is rapidly increasing among patients undergoing PCI treated with MCS, with marked variability in its use and associated outcomes. Although unmeasured confounding cannot be ruled out, when analyzed by time periods, or at the hospital level or the patient level, Impella use was associated with higher rates of adverse events and costs. More data are needed to define the appropriate role of MCS in patients undergoing PCI.


Asunto(s)
Bases de Datos Factuales , Costos de Hospital , Mortalidad Hospitalaria , Contrapulsador Intraaórtico/economía , Modelos Económicos , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/economía , Anciano , Femenino , Humanos , Contrapulsador Intraaórtico/tendencias , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/tendencias , Estudios Retrospectivos
3.
Lancet ; 396(10254): 830-838, 2020 09 19.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32877651

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Angina might persist or reoccur despite successful revascularisation with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and antianginal therapy. Additionally, PCI in stable patients has not been shown to improve survival compared with optimal medical therapy. Trimetazidine is an antianginal agent that improves energy metabolism of the ischaemic myocardium and might improve outcomes and symptoms of patients who recently had a PCI. In this study, we aimed to assess the long-term potential benefits and safety of trimetazidine added to standard evidence-based medical treatment in patients who had a recent successful PCI. METHODS: We did a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, event-driven trial of trimetazidine added to standard background therapy in patients who had undergone successful PCI at 365 centres in 27 countries across Europe, South America, Asia, and north Africa. Eligible patients were aged 21-85 years and had had either elective PCI for stable angina or urgent PCI for unstable angina or non-ST segment elevation myocardial infarction less than 30 days before randomisation. Patients were randomly assigned by an interactive web response system to oral trimetazidine 35 mg modified-release twice daily or matching placebo. Participants, study investigators, and all study staff were masked to treatment allocation. The primary efficacy endpoint was a composite of cardiac death; hospital admission for a cardiac event; recurrence or persistence of angina requiring an addition, switch, or increase of the dose of at least one antianginal drug; or recurrence or persistence of angina requiring a coronary angiography. Efficacy analyses were done according to the intention-to-treat principle. Safety was assessed in all patients who had at least one dose of study drug. This study is registered with the EU Clinical Trials Register (EudraCT 2010-022134-89). FINDINGS: From Sept 17, 2014, to June 15, 2016, 6007 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to receive either trimetazidine (n=2998) or placebo (n=3009). After a median follow-up of 47·5 months (IQR 42·3-53·3), incidence of primary endpoint events was not significantly different between the trimetazidine group (700 [23·3%] patients) and the placebo group (714 [23·7%]; hazard ratio 0·98 [95% CI 0·88-1·09], p=0·73). When analysed individually, there were no significant differences in the incidence of the components of the primary endpoint between the treatment groups. Similar results were obtained when patients were categorised according to whether they had an elective or urgent PCI. 1219 (40·9%) of 2983 patients in the trimetazidine group and 1230 (41·1%) of 2990 patients in the placebo group had serious treatment-emergent adverse events. Frequencies of adverse events of interest were similar between the groups. INTERPRETATION: Our results show that the routine use of oral trimetazidine 35 mg twice daily over several years in patients receiving optimal medical therapy, after successful PCI, does not influence the recurrence of angina or the outcome; these findings should be taken into account when considering the place of trimetazidine in clinical practice. However, the long-term prescription of this treatment does not appear to be associated with any statistically significant safety concerns in the population studied. FUNDING: Servier.


Asunto(s)
Infarto del Miocardio sin Elevación del ST/terapia , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/métodos , Trimetazidina/efectos adversos , Vasodilatadores/efectos adversos , Administración Oral , África del Norte/epidemiología , Anciano , Angina Estable/terapia , Angina Inestable/terapia , Asia/epidemiología , Estudios de Casos y Controles , Angiografía Coronaria/métodos , Angiografía Coronaria/estadística & datos numéricos , Muerte , Europa (Continente)/epidemiología , Femenino , Hospitalización/estadística & datos numéricos , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/tendencias , Placebos/administración & dosificación , Recurrencia , Seguridad , América del Sur/epidemiología , Resultado del Tratamiento , Trimetazidina/administración & dosificación , Trimetazidina/uso terapéutico , Vasodilatadores/administración & dosificación , Vasodilatadores/uso terapéutico
4.
Catheter Cardiovasc Interv ; 97(4): E475-E483, 2021 03.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32725858

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: During coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) epidemic, reducing the number of invasive procedure and choosing conservative medication strategy for patients with non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) is unavoidable. Whether this relatively conservative strategy will impact in-hospital outcome for NSTEMI patients remains unclear. METHODS AND RESULTS: The current study included all consecutive NSTEMI patients who visited the emergency department in Fuwai Hospital from February 1 to March 31, 2020 and all the NSTEMI patients in the same period of 2019 as a historical control. Very-high-risk patients were defined as clinical presentation of heart failure, cardiac shock, cardiac arrest, recurrent chest pain, and life-threatening arrhythmias. The primary outcome was in-hospital major adverse cardiac events (MACE), defined as a composite of all-cause death, recurrent myocardial infarction, or heart failure. A total of 115 NSTEMI patients were enrolled since the outbreak of COVID-19, and a total of 145 patients were included in the control group. There was a tendency toward higher MACE risk in 2020 compared with 2019 (18.3% vs. 11.7%, p = .14). Among very-high-risk patients, early percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) strategy in 2019 was associated with reduced MACE risk compared with delayed PCI in 2020 (60.6% [20/33] in 2020 vs. 27.9% [12/43] in 2019, p = .01). CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 pandemic results in a significant reduction in immediate/early PCI and a trend toward higher adverse event rate during hospitalization, particular in very-high-risk patients.


Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Servicio de Cardiología en Hospital/tendencias , Fármacos Cardiovasculares/uso terapéutico , Puente de Arteria Coronaria/tendencias , Servicio de Urgencia en Hospital/tendencias , Infarto del Miocardio sin Elevación del ST/terapia , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/tendencias , Salud Pública/tendencias , Anciano , Beijing , Fármacos Cardiovasculares/efectos adversos , Puente de Arteria Coronaria/efectos adversos , Puente de Arteria Coronaria/mortalidad , Femenino , Insuficiencia Cardíaca/etiología , Mortalidad Hospitalaria/tendencias , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Infarto del Miocardio sin Elevación del ST/complicaciones , Infarto del Miocardio sin Elevación del ST/diagnóstico , Infarto del Miocardio sin Elevación del ST/mortalidad , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/efectos adversos , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/mortalidad , Recurrencia , Estudios Retrospectivos , Medición de Riesgo , Factores de Riesgo , Factores de Tiempo , Resultado del Tratamiento
5.
BMC Cardiovasc Disord ; 21(1): 410, 2021 08 27.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34452596

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Rates of recommending percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) vary across clinicians. Whether clinicians agree on preferred treatment options for multivessel coronary artery disease patients has not been well studied. METHODS AND RESULTS: We distributed a survey to 104 clinicians from the Northern New England Cardiovascular Study Group through email and at a regional meeting with 88 (84.6%) responses. The survey described three clinical vignettes of multivessel coronary artery disease patients. For each patient vignette participants selected appropriate treatment options and whether they would use a patient decision aid. The likelihood of choosing PCI only or PCI/CABG over CABG only was modeled using a multinomial regression. Across all vignettes, participants selected CABG only as an appropriate treatment option 24.2% of the time, PCI only 25.4% of the time, and both CABG or PCI as appropriate treatment options 50.4% of the time. Surgeons were less likely to choose PCI over CABG (RR 0.14, 95% CI 0.03, 0.59) or both treatments over CABG only (RR 0.10, 95% CI 0.03, 0.34) relative to cardiologists. Overall, 65% of participants responded they would use a patient decision aid with each vignette. CONCLUSIONS: There is a lack of consensus on the appropriate treatment options across cardiologists and surgeons for patients with multivessel coronary artery disease. Treatment choice is influenced by both patient characteristics and clinician specialty.


Asunto(s)
Cardiólogos/tendencias , Puente de Arteria Coronaria/tendencias , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria/terapia , Técnicas de Apoyo para la Decisión , Enfermeras y Enfermeros/tendencias , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/tendencias , Pautas de la Práctica en Medicina/tendencias , Cirujanos/tendencias , Adolescente , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Conducta de Elección , Toma de Decisiones Clínicas , Consenso , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria/diagnóstico , Estudios Transversales , Femenino , Encuestas de Atención de la Salud , Estado de Salud , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , New England , Selección de Paciente , Adulto Joven
6.
BMC Cardiovasc Disord ; 21(1): 258, 2021 05 26.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34039268

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Limited data were available on the current trends in optimal medical therapy (OMT) after PCI and its influence on clinical outcomes in China. We aimed to evaluate the utilization and impact of OMT on the main adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCEs) in post-PCI patients and analyzed the factors predictive of OMT after discharge. METHODS: We collected data from 3812 individuals from 2016.10 to 2017.09 at TEDA International Cardiovascular Hospital. They were classified into an OMT group and a non-OMT group according to their OMT status, which was defined as the combination of dual antiplatelet therapy, statins, ß-blockers, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers after PCI. Multivariable Cox regression models were developed to assess the association between OMT and MACCEs, defined as all-cause mortality, nonfatal myocardial infarction, stroke, and target vessel revascularization. A logistic regression model was established to analyze the factors predictive of OMT. RESULTS: Our results revealed that the proportion of patients receiving OMT and its component drugs decreased over time. A total of 36.0% of patients were still adherent to OMT at the end of follow-up. Binary logistic regression analysis revealed that baseline OMT (P < 0.001, OR = 52.868) was the strongest predictor of OMT after PCI. The Cox hazard model suggested that smoking after PCI was associated with the 1-year risk of MACCE (P = 0.001, HR = 2.060, 95% CI 1.346-3.151), while OMT (P = 0.001, HR = 0.486, 95% CI 0.312-0.756) was an independent protective factor against postoperative MACCEs. CONCLUSIONS: There was still a gap between OMT utilization after PCI and the recommendations in the evidence-based guidelines. Sociodemographic and clinical factors influence the application of OMT. The management of OMT and smoking cessation after PCI should be emphasized.


Asunto(s)
Fármacos Cardiovasculares/uso terapéutico , Enfermedad Coronaria/terapia , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/tendencias , Pautas de la Práctica en Medicina/tendencias , Anciano , Fármacos Cardiovasculares/efectos adversos , China/epidemiología , Comorbilidad , Enfermedad Coronaria/diagnóstico , Enfermedad Coronaria/mortalidad , Utilización de Medicamentos/tendencias , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Cumplimiento de la Medicación , Persona de Mediana Edad , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/efectos adversos , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/mortalidad , Estudios Prospectivos , Medición de Riesgo , Factores de Riesgo , Fumar/efectos adversos , Fumar/mortalidad , Cese del Hábito de Fumar , Factores de Tiempo , Resultado del Tratamiento
7.
Anesth Analg ; 132(6): 1635-1644, 2021 06 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33780399

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Patients with existing coronary artery stents are at an increased risk for major adverse cardiac events (MACEs) when undergoing noncardiac surgery (NCS). Although the use of antifibrinolytic (AF) therapy in NCS has significantly increased in the past decade, the relationship between perioperative AF use and its association with MACEs among patients with existing coronary artery stents has yet to be assessed. In this study, we aim to evaluate the association of MACEs in patients with existing coronary artery stents who receive perioperative AF therapy during orthopedic surgery. METHODS: A single-center retrospective cohort study was conducted in adult patients with existing coronary artery stents who underwent orthopedic surgery from 2008 to 2018. Two cohorts were established: patients with existing coronary artery stents who did not receive perioperative AF and patients with coronary artery stents who received perioperative AF. Associations between AF use and the primary outcome of MACEs within 30 days postoperatively and the secondary outcomes of thrombotic complications, excessive surgical bleeding, and intensive care unit (ICU) admissions were analyzed using logistic regression models. Inverse probability of treatment weighting was used to control for confounding. Secondary analyses examining the association between coronary stent type/timing and the outcomes of interest were performed using unadjusted logistic regression models. RESULTS: A total of 473 patients met study criteria, including 294 who did not receive AF and 179 patients who received AF. MACEs occurred in 15 (5.1%) patients who did not receive AF and 1 (0.6%) who received AF (P = .007). In weighted analyses, no significant difference was found in patients who received AF with regard to MACEs (odds ratio [OR] = 0.13, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.01-1.74, P = .12), thrombotic complications (OR = 1.19, 95% CI, 0.53-2.68, P = .68), or excessive surgical bleeding (OR = 0.13, 95% CI, 0.01-2.23, P = .16) compared to patients who did not receive AF. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study are inconclusive whether an association exists between perioperative AF use in patients with coronary artery stents and the outcome of MACEs compared to patients who did not receive perioperative AF therapy. The authors acknowledge that the imprecise CI hinders the ability to definitively determine whether an association exists in the study population. Further large prospective studies, powered to detect differences in MACEs, are needed to assess the safety of perioperative AF in patients with existing coronary artery stents and to clarify the mechanism of perioperative MACEs in this high-risk population.


Asunto(s)
Antifibrinolíticos/administración & dosificación , Procedimientos Ortopédicos/tendencias , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/tendencias , Atención Perioperativa/tendencias , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/etiología , Stents/tendencias , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Antifibrinolíticos/efectos adversos , Estudios de Cohortes , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Procedimientos Ortopédicos/efectos adversos , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/efectos adversos , Atención Perioperativa/efectos adversos , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/diagnóstico , Estudios Retrospectivos , Factores de Riesgo , Stents/efectos adversos
8.
Heart Vessels ; 36(10): 1474-1483, 2021 Oct.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33743048

RESUMEN

There are a few Japanese data regarding the incidence and outcomes of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) after the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak. We retrospectively reviewed the data of AMI patients admitted to the Nihon University Itabashi Hospital after a COVID-19 outbreak in 2020 (COVID-19 period) and the same period from 2017 to 2019 (control period). The patients' characteristics, time course of admission, diagnosis, and treatment of AMI, and 30-day mortality were compared between the two period-groups for both ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and non-STEMI (NSTEMI), respectively. The AMI inpatients decreased by 5.7% after the COVID-19 outbreak. There were no differences among most patient backgrounds between the two-period groups. For NSTEMI, the time from the symptom onset to admission was significantly longer, and that from the AMI diagnosis to the catheter examination tended to be longer during the COVID-19 period than the control period, but not for STEMI. The 30-day mortality was significantly higher during the COVID-19 period for NSTEMI (23.1% vs. 1.9%, P = 0.004), but not for STEMI (9.4% vs. 8.3%, P = 0.77). In conclusion, hospitalizations for AMI decreased after the COVID-19 outbreak. Acute cardiac care for STEMI and the associated outcome did not change, but NSTEMI outcome worsened after the COVID-19 outbreak, which may have been associated with delayed medical treatment due to the indirect impact of the COVID-19 pandemic.


Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Angiografía Coronaria/tendencias , Hospitalización/tendencias , Infarto del Miocardio/terapia , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/tendencias , Tiempo de Tratamiento/tendencias , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Femenino , Mortalidad Hospitalaria/tendencias , Humanos , Incidencia , Japón/epidemiología , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Infarto del Miocardio/diagnóstico por imagen , Infarto del Miocardio/mortalidad , Aceptación de la Atención de Salud , Estudios Retrospectivos , Medición de Riesgo , Factores de Riesgo , Factores de Tiempo , Resultado del Tratamiento
9.
Artif Organs ; 45(5): 454-463, 2021 May.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33107042

RESUMEN

Smart materials have intrinsic properties that change in a controlled fashion in response to external stimuli. Currently, the only smart materials with a significant clinical impact in cardiovascular implant design are shape memory alloys, particularly Nitinol. Recent prodigious progress in material science has resulted in the development of sophisticated shape memory polymers. In this article, we have reviewed the literature and outline the characteristics, advantages, and disadvantages of shape memory alloys and shape memory polymers which are relevant to clinical cardiovascular applications, and describe the potential of these smart materials for applications in coronary stents and transcatheter valves.


Asunto(s)
Enfermedades Cardiovasculares/cirugía , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/instrumentación , Polímeros/uso terapéutico , Materiales Inteligentes/uso terapéutico , Reemplazo de la Válvula Aórtica Transcatéter/instrumentación , Diseño de Equipo , Humanos , Ensayo de Materiales , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/tendencias , Stents/tendencias , Reemplazo de la Válvula Aórtica Transcatéter/tendencias
10.
Circulation ; 140(3): 240-261, 2019 07 16.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31116032

RESUMEN

Identification and management of patients at high bleeding risk undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention are of major importance, but a lack of standardization in defining this population limits trial design, data interpretation, and clinical decision-making. The Academic Research Consortium for High Bleeding Risk (ARC-HBR) is a collaboration among leading research organizations, regulatory authorities, and physician-scientists from the United States, Asia, and Europe focusing on percutaneous coronary intervention-related bleeding. Two meetings of the 31-member consortium were held in Washington, DC, in April 2018 and in Paris, France, in October 2018. These meetings were organized by the Cardiovascular European Research Center on behalf of the ARC-HBR group and included representatives of the US Food and Drug Administration and the Japanese Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices Agency, as well as observers from the pharmaceutical and medical device industries. A consensus definition of patients at high bleeding risk was developed that was based on review of the available evidence. The definition is intended to provide consistency in defining this population for clinical trials and to complement clinical decision-making and regulatory review. The proposed ARC-HBR consensus document represents the first pragmatic approach to a consistent definition of high bleeding risk in clinical trials evaluating the safety and effectiveness of devices and drug regimens for patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention.


Asunto(s)
Congresos como Asunto , Consenso , Hemorragia/diagnóstico , Hemorragia/etiología , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/efectos adversos , Anticoagulantes/administración & dosificación , Anticoagulantes/efectos adversos , Congresos como Asunto/tendencias , District of Columbia , Hemorragia/prevención & control , Humanos , Paris , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/tendencias , Medición de Riesgo/métodos
11.
Circulation ; 139(4): 458-472, 2019 01 22.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30586696

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Although many studies show an inverse association between operator procedural volume and short-term adverse outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), the association between procedural volume and longer-term outcomes is unknown. METHODS: Using the National Cardiovascular Data Registry CathPCI registry data linked with Medicare claims data, we examined the association between operator PCI volume and long-term outcomes among patients ≥65 years of age. Operators were stratified by average annual PCI volume (counting PCIs performed in patients of all ages): low- (<50 PCIs), intermediate- (50-100), and high- (>100) volume operators. One-year unadjusted rates of death and major adverse coronary events (MACEs; defined as death, readmission for myocardial infarction, or unplanned coronary revascularization) were calculated with Kaplan-Meier methods. The proportional hazards assumption was not met, and risk-adjusted associations between operator volume and outcomes were calculated separately from the time of PCI to hospital discharge and from hospital discharge to 1-year follow-up. RESULTS: Between July 1, 2009, and December 31, 2014, 723 644 PCI procedures were performed by 8936 operators: 2553 high-, 2878 intermediate-, and 3505 low-volume operators. Compared with high- and intermediate-volume operators, low-volume operators more often performed emergency PCI, and their patients had fewer cardiovascular comorbidities. Over 1-year follow-up, 15.9% of patients treated by low-volume operators had a MACE compared with 16.9% of patients treated by high-volume operators ( P=0.004). After multivariable adjustment, intermediate- and high-volume operators had a significantly lower rate of in-hospital death than low-volume operators (odds ratio, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.86-0.96 for intermediate versus low; odds ratio, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.75-0.83 for high versus low). There were no significant differences in rates of MACEs, death, myocardial infarction, or unplanned revascularization between operator cohorts from hospital discharge to 1-year follow-up (adjusted hazard ratio for MACEs, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.96-1.01 for intermediate versus low; hazard ratio, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.99-1.04 for high versus low). CONCLUSIONS: Unadjusted 1-year outcomes after PCI were worse for older adults treated by operators with higher annual volume; however, patients treated by these operators had more cardiovascular comorbidities. After risk adjustment, higher operator volume was associated with lower in-hospital mortality and no difference in postdischarge MACEs.


Asunto(s)
Hospitales de Alto Volumen/tendencias , Hospitales de Bajo Volumen/tendencias , Evaluación de Procesos y Resultados en Atención de Salud/tendencias , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/tendencias , Pautas de la Práctica en Medicina/tendencias , Carga de Trabajo , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Bases de Datos Factuales , Femenino , Mortalidad Hospitalaria/tendencias , Humanos , Masculino , Medicare , Readmisión del Paciente/tendencias , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/efectos adversos , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/mortalidad , Sistema de Registros , Retratamiento/tendencias , Estudios Retrospectivos , Factores de Riesgo , Factores de Tiempo , Resultado del Tratamiento , Estados Unidos
12.
Cardiovasc Diabetol ; 19(1): 215, 2020 12 18.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33339541

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: It has been suggested the COVID pandemic may have indirectly affected the treatment and outcome of STEMI patients, by avoidance or significant delays in contacting the emergency system. No data have been reported on the impact of diabetes on treatment and outcome of STEMI patients, that was therefore the aim of the current subanalysis conducted in patients included in the International Study on Acute Coronary Syndromes-ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction (ISACS-STEMI) COVID-19. METHODS: The ISACS-STEMI COVID-19 is a retrospective registry performed in European centers with an annual volume of > 120 primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and assessed STEMI patients, treated with primary PCI during the same periods of the years 2019 versus 2020 (March and April). Main outcomes are the incidences of primary PCI, delayed treatment, and in-hospital mortality. RESULTS: A total of 6609 patients underwent primary PCI in 77 centers, located in 18 countries. Diabetes was observed in a total of 1356 patients (20.5%), with similar proportion between 2019 and 2020. During the pandemic, there was a significant reduction in primary PCI as compared to 2019, similar in both patients with (Incidence rate ratio (IRR) 0.79 (95% CI: 0.73-0.85, p < 0.0001) and without diabetes (IRR 0.81 (95% CI: 0.78-0.85, p < 0.0001) (p int = 0.40). We observed a significant heterogeneity among centers in the population with and without diabetes (p < 0.001, respectively). The heterogeneity among centers was not related to the incidence of death due to COVID-19 in both groups of patients. Interaction was observed for Hypertension (p = 0.024) only in absence of diabetes. Furthermore, the pandemic was independently associated with a significant increase in door-to-balloon and total ischemia times only among patients without diabetes, which may have contributed to the higher mortality, during the pandemic, observed in this group of patients. CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 pandemic had a significant impact on the treatment of patients with STEMI, with a similar reduction in primary PCI procedures in both patients with and without diabetes. Hypertension had a significant impact on PCI reduction only among patients without diabetes. We observed a significant increase in ischemia time and door-to-balloon time mainly in absence of diabetes, that contributed to explain the increased mortality observed in this group of patients during the pandemic. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04412655.


Asunto(s)
COVID-19/epidemiología , Diabetes Mellitus/epidemiología , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/tendencias , Infarto del Miocardio con Elevación del ST/terapia , Tiempo de Tratamiento/tendencias , Anciano , COVID-19/diagnóstico , COVID-19/mortalidad , Diabetes Mellitus/diagnóstico , Diabetes Mellitus/mortalidad , Europa (Continente)/epidemiología , Femenino , Mortalidad Hospitalaria/tendencias , Humanos , Hipertensión/epidemiología , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/efectos adversos , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/mortalidad , Sistema de Registros , Estudios Retrospectivos , Factores de Riesgo , Infarto del Miocardio con Elevación del ST/mortalidad , Factores de Tiempo , Resultado del Tratamiento
13.
Catheter Cardiovasc Interv ; 96(6): 1258-1265, 2020 11.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32840956

RESUMEN

The society for cardiovascular angiography and interventions (SCAI) think tank is a collaborative venture that brings together interventional cardiologists, administrative partners, and select members of the cardiovascular industry community for high-level field-wide discussions. The 2020 think tank was organized into four parallel sessions reflective of the field of interventional cardiology: (a) coronary intervention, (b) endovascular medicine, (c) structural heart disease, and (d) congenital heart disease (CHD). Each session was moderated by a senior content expert and co-moderated by a member of SCAI's emerging leader mentorship program. This document presents the proceedings to the wider cardiovascular community in order to enhance participation in this discussion, create additional dialogue from a broader base, and thereby aid SCAI and the industry community in developing specific action items to move these areas forward.


Asunto(s)
Cateterismo Cardíaco/tendencias , Cardiología/tendencias , Angiografía Coronaria/tendencias , Cardiopatías/diagnóstico por imagen , Cardiopatías/terapia , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/tendencias , Difusión de Innovaciones , Cardiopatías/fisiopatología , Humanos
14.
Catheter Cardiovasc Interv ; 96(6): E568-E575, 2020 11.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32686899

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 pandemic has affected healthcare systems worldwide. Resources are being shifted and potentially jeopardize safety of non-COVID-19 patients with comorbidities. Our aim was to investigate the impact of national lockdown and SARS-CoV-2 pandemic on percutaneous treatment of coronary artery disease in Poland. METHODS: Data on patients who underwent percutaneous coronary procedures (angiography and/or percutaneous coronary intervention [PCI]) were extracted for March 13-May 13, 2020 from a national PCI database (ORPKI Registry) during the first month of national lockdown and compared with analogous time period in 2019. RESULTS: Of 163 cardiac catheterization centers in Poland, 15 (9.2%) were indefinitely or temporarily closed down due to SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. There were nine physicians (9 of 544; 1.7%) who were infected with SARS-CoV-2. There were 13,750 interventional cardiology procedures performed in Poland in the analyzed time period. In 66% of cases an acute coronary syndrome was diagnosed, and in the remaining 34% it was an elective procedure for the chronic coronary syndrome in comparison to 50% in 2019 (p < .001). There were 362 patients (2.6% of all) with COVID-19 confirmed/suspected who were treated in interventional cardiology centers and 145 with ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction (STEMI) diagnosis (6% of all STEMIs). CONCLUSIONS: Due to SARS-CoV-2 pandemic there was an absolute reduction in the number of interventional procedures both acute and elective in comparison to 2019 and a significant shift into acute procedures. COVID-19 confirmed/suspected patients do not differ in terms of procedural and baseline characteristics and reveal similar outcomes when treated with percutaneous coronary interventions.


Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Cardiólogos/tendencias , Angiografía Coronaria/tendencias , Cardiopatías/diagnóstico por imagen , Cardiopatías/terapia , Evaluación de Procesos y Resultados en Atención de Salud/tendencias , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/tendencias , Pautas de la Práctica en Medicina/tendencias , Anciano , Angiografía Coronaria/efectos adversos , Bases de Datos Factuales , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/efectos adversos , Polonia , Sistema de Registros , Factores de Tiempo , Resultado del Tratamiento
15.
Catheter Cardiovasc Interv ; 96(2): 268-273, 2020 08.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31797564

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to identify barriers to transradial access percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). BACKGROUND: Transradial access yields fewer vascular complications, earlier ambulation, and more patient comfort. However, the adoption to practice is slow, and transfemoral access is still commonly used. METHODS: We identified all PCIs done by one operator in a radial-first trainee-driven practice. The individual charts were reviewed for all PCIs using femoral access. Reasons for not using radial access were identified. Descriptive statistics were used to report reasons for not using transradial access. Analyses were performed on a per-procedure basis. RESULTS: Of 1,948 PCIs, 1,790 (92%) were via radial access and 158 (8%) via femoral access. Femoral access was used to bail out unsuccessful radial access in 21 PCIs (13% of all femoral PCIs, 1% of all PCIs). Radial access was unsuccessful due to failure to cannulate radial artery, radial artery spasm, and radial loop in majority of radial access failure PCIs (n = 13). Femoral access was used as a primary strategy in 137 PCIs (87% of all femoral PCIs, 7% of all PCIs), mostly due to undetectable radial artery pulse (both left and right) (n = 40). CONCLUSIONS: Radial access can be used for PCI safely and effectively. Inadequate radial pulse is the main barrier. Adjunctive strategies such as ulnar access and use of ultrasound may further increase the success rate of arterial access from the upper extremities.


Asunto(s)
Cateterismo Periférico/tendencias , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria/terapia , Arteria Femoral , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/tendencias , Pautas de la Práctica en Medicina/tendencias , Arteria Radial , Anciano , Cateterismo Periférico/efectos adversos , Angiografía Coronaria/tendencias , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria/diagnóstico por imagen , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/efectos adversos , Punciones , Sistema de Registros , Estudios Retrospectivos , Factores de Riesgo , Resultado del Tratamiento
16.
Catheter Cardiovasc Interv ; 95(4): 675-683, 2020 03 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31115141

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Women may benefit from radial artery access (RAA) for percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) due to a higher risk of bleeding compared to men; however, RAA may be underutilized in women. We sought to determine the frequency and predictors of RAA use in patients undergoing PCI. METHODS: We studied 21,123 (29.0% female) participants in the Mayo Clinic PCI Registry from January 1, 2006-December 31, 2016. Data were analyzed as a cohort and by time tertiles. Frequency of RAA versus femoral access and bleeding events were recorded. Logistic regression was used to identify predictors of RAA. RESULTS: In the overall cohort, women compared to men were older (69.6 ± 12.6 vs. 65.6 ± 11.9; p < .001), more likely to present with acute coronary syndrome (82.0% in women vs. 80.0% in men; p = .0008) and had more comorbidities. RAA increased from tertile one (3.5% for women vs. 4.0% for men; p = .3) through tertile three (46.8% for women vs. 50.3% for men; p = .01), but remained lower in women. In multivariable analysis, female sex is associated with 22% less RAA use (OR 0.78, 95% CI 0.72-0.84; p < .0001). Women compared to men experienced more bleeding (6.3 vs. 3.0%; p < .0001) but bleeding was less likely in RAA (OR 0.45, 95% CI 0.36-0.56; p < .0001). CONCLUSION: Women undergoing PCI are less likely to receive RAA compared to men despite having a higher risk of bleeding. This trend persists despite increase in RAA use. Given the potential benefit of RAA in women, sex should be considered in patient selection for RAA.


Asunto(s)
Cateterismo Periférico/tendencias , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria/terapia , Arteria Femoral , Disparidades en Atención de Salud/tendencias , Evaluación de Procesos y Resultados en Atención de Salud/tendencias , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/tendencias , Pautas de la Práctica en Medicina/tendencias , Arteria Radial , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Anticoagulantes/uso terapéutico , Cateterismo Periférico/efectos adversos , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria/diagnóstico por imagen , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria/fisiopatología , Femenino , Hemorragia/etiología , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/efectos adversos , Inhibidores de Agregación Plaquetaria/uso terapéutico , Punciones , Sistema de Registros , Estudios Retrospectivos , Medición de Riesgo , Factores de Riesgo , Factores Sexuales , Factores de Tiempo , Resultado del Tratamiento , Estados Unidos
17.
Catheter Cardiovasc Interv ; 96(1): E59-E66, 2020 07.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31724274

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: There are limited data on the use of intravascular ultrasound (IVUS), optical coherence tomography (OCT), and fractional flow reserve (FFR) during acute myocardial infarction (AMI). OBJECTIVES: To assess the temporal trends of IVUS, OCT, and FFR use in AMI. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study from the National Inpatient Sample (2004-2014) was designed to include AMI admissions that received coronary angiography. Administrative codes were used to identify percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), IVUS, OCT, and FFR. Outcomes included temporal trends, inhospital mortality and resource utilization stratified by IVUS, OCT, or FFR use. RESULTS: In 4,419,973 AMI admissions, IVUS, OCT, and FFR were used in 2.6%, 0.1%, and 0.6%, respectively. There was a 22-fold, 118-fold, and 33-fold adjusted increase in IVUS, OCT, and FFR use, respectively, in 2014 compared to the first year of use. Non-ST-elevation AMI presentation, male sex, private insurance coverage, admission to a large urban hospital, and absence of cardiac arrest and cardiogenic shock were associated with higher IVUS, OCT, or FFR use. PCI was performed in 83.2% of the IVUS, OCT, or FFR cohort compared to 64.2% of the control group (p < .001). The cohort with IVUS/OCT/FFR use had lower inhospital mortality (adjusted odds ratio 0.53 [95% confidence interval 0.50-0.56]), more frequent discharges to home (83.7% vs. 76.8%), shorter hospital stays (4.3 ± 4.4 vs. 5.0 ± 5.5 days) and higher hospitalization costs ($90,683 ± 74,093 vs. $74,671 ± 75,841). CONCLUSIONS: In AMI, the use of IVUS, OCT, and FFR has increased during 2004-2014. Significant patient and hospital-level disparities exist in the use of these technologies.


Asunto(s)
Cateterismo Cardíaco/tendencias , Reserva del Flujo Fraccional Miocárdico , Infarto del Miocardio/diagnóstico por imagen , Infarto del Miocardio/fisiopatología , Tomografía de Coherencia Óptica/tendencias , Ultrasonografía Intervencional/tendencias , Anciano , Cateterismo Cardíaco/economía , Angiografía Coronaria/tendencias , Bases de Datos Factuales , Femenino , Disparidades en Atención de Salud/tendencias , Costos de Hospital/tendencias , Mortalidad Hospitalaria/tendencias , Humanos , Pacientes Internos , Tiempo de Internación/tendencias , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Infarto del Miocardio/mortalidad , Infarto del Miocardio/terapia , Alta del Paciente/tendencias , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/tendencias , Valor Predictivo de las Pruebas , Estudios Retrospectivos , Factores de Tiempo , Tomografía de Coherencia Óptica/economía , Resultado del Tratamiento , Ultrasonografía Intervencional/economía , Estados Unidos
18.
Catheter Cardiovasc Interv ; 96(6): 1184-1197, 2020 11.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32129574

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVES: To assess national trends of acute kidney injury (AKI) incidence, incremental costs, risk factors, and readmissions among patients undergoing coronary angiography (CAG) and/or percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) during 2012-2017. BACKGROUND: AKI remains a serious complication for patients undergoing CAG/PCI. Evidence is lacking in contemporary AKI trends and its impact on hospital resource utilization. METHODS: Patients who underwent CAG/PCI procedures in 749 hospitals were identified from Premier Healthcare Database. AKI was defined by ICD-9/10 diagnosis codes (584.9/N17.9, 583.89/N14.1, 583.9/N05.9, E947.8/T50.8X5) during 7 days post index procedure. Multivariable regression models were used to adjust for confounders. RESULTS: Among 2,763,681 patients, AKI incidence increased from 6.0 to 8.4% or 14% per year in overall patients; from 18.0 to 28.4% in those with chronic kidney disease (CKD) and from 2.4 to 4.2% in those without CKD (all p < .001). Significant risk factors for AKI included older age, being uninsured, inpatient procedures, CKD, anemia, and diabetes (all p < .001). AKI was associated with higher 30-day in-hospital mortality (ORadjusted = 2.55; 95% CI: 2.40, 2.70) and readmission risk (ORadjusted = 1.52; 95% CI: 1.50, 1.55). The AKI-related incremental cost during index visit and 30-day readmissions were estimated to be $8,416 and $580 per inpatient procedure and $927 and $6,145 per outpatient procedure. Overall excess healthcare burden associated with AKI was $1.67 billion. CONCLUSIONS: AKI incidence increased significantly in this large, multifacility sample of patients undergoing CAG/PCI procedures and was associated with substantial increase in hospital costs, readmissions, and mortality. Efforts to reduce AKI risk in US healthcare system are warranted.


Asunto(s)
Lesión Renal Aguda/epidemiología , Cateterismo Cardíaco/tendencias , Angiografía Coronaria/tendencias , Costos de la Atención en Salud/tendencias , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/tendencias , Lesión Renal Aguda/economía , Lesión Renal Aguda/terapia , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Cateterismo Cardíaco/efectos adversos , Cateterismo Cardíaco/economía , Angiografía Coronaria/efectos adversos , Angiografía Coronaria/economía , Bases de Datos Factuales , Femenino , Costos de Hospital/tendencias , Humanos , Incidencia , Tiempo de Internación/economía , Tiempo de Internación/tendencias , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Readmisión del Paciente/economía , Readmisión del Paciente/tendencias , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/efectos adversos , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/economía , Medición de Riesgo , Factores de Riesgo , Factores de Tiempo , Resultado del Tratamiento , Estados Unidos/epidemiología
19.
Catheter Cardiovasc Interv ; 96(4): 802-810, 2020 10 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31713989

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVES: We sought to assess the national trends in the utilization and outcomes of percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) in patients with cirrhosis. BACKGROUND: Contemporary data on PCI in patients with liver cirrhosis are limited. METHODS: The National-Inpatient-Sample was used to identify patients who underwent PCI between 2003 and 2016. We examined the annual PCI rate, and compared the in-hospital morbidity, mortality, resource utilization, and cost following PCI in patients with and without cirrhosis. RESULTS: A total of 8,860,178 PCI hospitalizations were identified, of those, 20,339 (0.2%) were performed in patients with cirrhosis. Annual PCI rates decreased overtime in patients without liver cirrhosis but increased in those with cirrhosis (Ptrend < .001). Patients with cirrhosis had a characteristic clinical, demographic, and socioeconomic profile compared with those without cirrhosis. The use of bare-metal stents decreased from 69.1 to 11.4% in the noncirrhosis group, and from 81.9 to 21.3% in the cirrhosis group. Compared with propensity-matched patients without cirrhosis, PCI in cirrhotic patients was associated with higher in-hospital mortality across all indications (STEMI 19.1 vs. 11.5%, p = .002; NSTEMI 8.7 vs. 5.6%, p = .002; and UA/SIHD 7.7 vs. 4.3%, p < .001). Cirrhotic patients also had significantly higher rates of acute kidney injury, but similar rates of vascular complications and stroke. Additionally, cirrhotic patients had longer hospitalizations, were less likely to be discharged home, and accrued higher cost across all PCI indications. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with cirrhosis who are deemed "suitable PCI candidates" in current practice remain at high-risk for worse short-term morbidity and mortality, and higher cost of care.


Asunto(s)
Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria/terapia , Cirrosis Hepática , Evaluación de Procesos y Resultados en Atención de Salud/tendencias , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/tendencias , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria/diagnóstico , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria/economía , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria/mortalidad , Bases de Datos Factuales , Femenino , Costos de Hospital , Mortalidad Hospitalaria/tendencias , Humanos , Pacientes Internos , Cirrosis Hepática/diagnóstico , Cirrosis Hepática/economía , Cirrosis Hepática/mortalidad , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Evaluación de Procesos y Resultados en Atención de Salud/economía , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/efectos adversos , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/economía , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/mortalidad , Medición de Riesgo , Factores de Riesgo , Stents/tendencias , Factores de Tiempo , Resultado del Tratamiento , Estados Unidos/epidemiología
20.
Pharmacol Res ; 158: 104883, 2020 08.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32446979

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Xinyue capsule, a patented Chinese herbal medicine, has been used to manage coronary artery disease (CAD) for over a decade in China, but whether it can further reduce risk of cardiovascular events beyond conventional treatment is unknown. METHODS: In this multicenter, randomized, placebo-controlled trial, we randomly assigned patients with stable CAD who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) within the preceding 3-12 months to receive Xinyue capsule (100 mg panax quinquefolius saponins, three times a day) or placebo for 24 weeks in addition to conventional treatment. The primary endpoint was a composite that included cardiac death, nonfatal myocardial infarction and urgent revascularization with either PCI or coronary artery bypass grafting. The secondary composite endpoints included stroke, re-hospitalization due to acute coronary syndrome (ACS), pulmonary embolism, peripheral vascular events and all-cause mortality. Quality of life was assessed using a 36-item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36). RESULTS: A total of 1054 participants were included in the analyses. The median follow up was 1 year. The primary endpoint events occurred in 16 patients (3.02%) in the Xinyue group and 34 patients (6.49%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio [HR] 0.455, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.25 to 0.825; P = 0.009). Secondary end-point events occurred in 5.47% of patients in the Xinyue group and 10.31% in the placebo group (HR 0.515, 95% CI 0.328 to 0.809; P = 0.004). SF-36 subscale scores at 12 months were significantly higher in the Xinyue group than placebo group for general health (P = 0.048) and vitality (P = 0.008). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with stable CAD after PCI within the preceding 3 to 12 months, Xinyue capsule added on conventional treatment reduced the incidence of primary composite endpoint (cardiac death, nonfatal myocardial infarction and urgent revascularization).


Asunto(s)
Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria/tratamiento farmacológico , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria/cirugía , Medicamentos Herbarios Chinos/uso terapéutico , Panax , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/tendencias , Saponinas/uso terapéutico , Anciano , Cápsulas , China/epidemiología , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria/epidemiología , Método Doble Ciego , Femenino , Estudios de Seguimiento , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA