ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Acute variceal bleeding (AVB) is a major complication in patients with cirrhosis. Using a nationwide AVB audit, we performed a nested cohort study to determine whether full adherence to the AVB quality indicator (QI) improves clinical outcomes in patients with cirrhosis and AVB. APPROACH AND RESULTS: We assessed real-world adherence to AVB QI among patients with cirrhosis admitted for AVB in all public hospitals in Singapore between January 2015 and December 2020. Full adherence was considered when all 5 QIs were fulfilled: prophylactic antibiotics, vasoactive agents, timely endoscopy, endoscopic hemostasis during index endoscopy, and nonselective beta-blockers after AVB. We compare 6-week mortality between the full adherence and suboptimal adherence groups using a propensity-matched cohort.A total of 989 patients with AVB were included. Full adherence to all AVB QI was suboptimal (56.5%). Analysis of the propensity-matched cohort with comparable baseline characteristics showed that full adherence was associated with a lower risk of early infection (20.0% vs. 26.9%), early rebleeding (5.2% vs. 10.2%), and mortality at 6 weeks (8.2% vs. 19.7%) and 1 year (21.3% vs. 35.4%) ( p <0.05 for all). While full adherence was associated with a lower 6-week mortality regardless of the MELD score, nonadherence was associated with a higher 6-week mortality despite a lower predicted risk of 6-week mortality. Despite high adherence to the recommended process measures, patients with CTP-C remain at a higher risk of rebleeding, 6-week and 1-year mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Full adherence to the AVB QI should be the target for quality improvement in patients with cirrhosis.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Drug-coated balloons (DCB) have been used to treat de novo small vessel coronary disease (SVD), with promising results and shorter dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) duration compared to drug-eluting stents (DES). We compared safety and effectiveness of the two treatments at 1 year. METHODS: We reviewed 3,613 angioplasty cases retrospectively from 2011 to 2013 and identified 335 patients with SVD treated with device diameter of ≤2.5 mm. DCB-only angioplasty was performed in 172 patients, whereas 163 patients were treated with second-generation DES. RESULTS: DCB patients had smaller reference vessel diameter (2.22 ± 0.30 vs. 2.44 ± 0.19 mm, P < 0.001) and received smaller devices (median diameter 2.25 vs. 2.50 mm, P < 0.001) compared to the DES group. DES-treated vessels had larger acute lumen gain (1.71 ± 0.48 mm) than DCB (1.00 ± 0.53 mm, P < 0.001). Half the patients had diabetes mellitus. While there were more patients presenting with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) in the DCB group (77.9% vs. 62.2%, P = 0.013), they received shorter DAPT (7.4 ± 4.7 vs. 11.8 ± 1.4 months, P < 0.001) than the DES group. The 1-year composite major adverse cardiac event rate was 11.6% in the DCB arm and 11.7% in the DES arm (P = 1.000), with target lesion revascularization rate of 5.2% and 3.7%, respectively, (P = 0.601). CONCLUSIONS: In this high-risk cohort of patients, DCB-only angioplasty delivered good clinical outcome at 1 year. The results were comparable with DES-treated patients, but had the added benefit of a shorter DAPT regime.
