Rationale and Design of the Persian CardioVascular Disease Registry (PCVDR): Scale-Up of Persian Registry Of CardioVascular DiseasE (PROVE).

We aimed to present the methodology of a national registry entitled "Persian CardioVascular Disease Registry (PCVDR)." Persian Registry Of cardioVascular diseasE (PROVE) was a demonstration registry conducted in Isfahan since 2014 to test the feasibility and practicality of PCVDR in Iran. Built on that experience, the first phase of PCVDR that consist of angiography and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) registry at national level started in March 2017. Currently, PCVDR is in place in 19 hospitals, located in 7 provinces. Five questionnaires including basic information, angiography, and PCI techniques, discharge and follow-up were completed for registered patients. Since beginning until October 7th, 2019, the number of angiography and PCI cases registered in all provinces were 37,120 and 16,277, respectively. Of all PCI cases registered, 11,846 patients (72.8%) were followed up until 12 months. We expect that this registry be expanded to cover most hospitals and centers with cardiology departments in the country.

Persian Registry Of cardioVascular diseasE (PROVE): Design and methodology.

BACKGROUND: Our aim was to create and establish a database called "Persian Registry Of cardioVascular diseasE (PROVE)" in order to be used for future research and in addition, as a tool to develop national guidelines for diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of cardiovascular disease (CVD). In this paper, the design and methodology of the PROVE pilot study will be discussed, launched in Isfahan, Iran, in 2015-2016. METHODS: Through establishing PROVE, patients' data were collected from hospitals and outpatient clinics prospectively or retrospectively and followed up for a maximum of three years based on the type of CVDs. The inclusion criteria were as patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS), ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), stroke, atrial fibrillation (AF), heart failure (HF), congenital heart disease (CHD), percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), and chronic ischemic cardiovascular disease (CICD). Specific protocols, questionnaires, and glossaries were developed for each registry. In order to ensure the validation of the protocols, questionnaires, data collection, management, and analysis, a well-established quality control (QC) protocol was developed and implemented. Data confidentiality was considered. RESULTS: In order to register patients with ACS, STEMI, stroke, HF, PCI, and CICD, the hospital recorded data were used, whereas, in case of AF and CHD registries, the data were collected from hospitals and outpatient clinics. During the pilot phase of the study in Isfahan, from March 2015 to September 2016, 9427 patients were registered as ACS including 809 as STEMI, 1195 patients with HF, 363 with AF, 761 with stroke, 1136 with CHD, 1200 with PCI, and 9 with CICD. Data collection and management were performed under the supervision of the QC group. CONCLUSION: PROVE was developed and implemented in Isfahan as a pilot study, in order to be implemented at national level in future. It provides a valuable source of valid data that could be used for future research, re-evaluation of current CVD management and more specifically, gap analysis and as a tool for assessment of the type of CVDs, prevention, treatment, and control by health care decision makers.

Primary percutaneous coronary intervention in the Isfahan province, Iran; A situation analysis and needs assessment.

BACKGROUND: Primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI) is considered as a choice of treatment in ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). PPCI has been performed in the Isfahan Province for several years. This study was performed to describe the situation, and determine in-hospital and early (30 days) clinical outcomes of the patients in order to provide sufficient evidence to evaluate and modify this treatment modality if necessary. METHODS: All patients, who underwent PPCI for STEMI from July to December 2011 at Chamran and Saadi Hospitals (PPCI centers in the Isfahan Province), were included in this case series study. Premedication, angioplasty procedure, and post-procedural treatment were performed using standard protocols or techniques. All discharged patients were followed for 30 days by phone. Endpoints consisted of clinical success rate, and in-hospital and 30 day major adverse cardiac events (MACEs) (death, reinfarction, stroke, and target vessel revascularization). RESULTS: 93 patients (83 (89.2%) at Chamran Hospital and 10 (10.8%) patients at Saadi Hospital) had PPCI. Mean Age of the patients was 59.60 ± 11.10 and M/F ratio was 3.89. From the 181 involved vessels (involved vessels/patient ratio = 1.97 ± 0.70), the treatment of 105 lesions (lesions/patient ratio = 1.13 ± 0.368) was attempted. The clinical success rate was 72%. Pain-to-door and door-to-balloon times were, respectively, 255.1 ± 221.4 and 148.9 ± 168.5 min. The reason for failure was impaired flow (n = 17 (18.3%)), failure to cross with a guidewire (n = 2 (2.2%)), suboptimal angiographic results (n = 2 (2.2%)), and death in one patient. The in-hospital and 30 days MACE rates were, respectively, 8.6% and 3.2%. CONCLUSION: Low success rate in our series could be due to prolonged pain-to-door and door-to-balloon times and lack of an established, definite protocol to regularly perform PPCI in a timely fashion. We should resolve these problems and improve our techniques in order to prevent and treat slow/no-reflow phenomenon.