Percutaneous coronary intervention without surgery on‐site is here to stay
نویسنده
چکیده
The need for emergency cardiac bypass surgery due to a complication occurring during a PCI procedure has gone down from an initial 6–10 % in the early 1980s to less than 0.5 % in the present era [1]. Technological advances have made the procedure very safe in the hands of experienced operators working in dedicated centres. In Europe in the last decade, many PCI programs without surgery on-site have been started as a consequence of this rare need for actual surgical backup. In addition, these PCI programs were started in (mostly rural) regions where travel distances to PCI centres with surgery on-site resulted in long delays for STEMI patients undergoing primary PCI. The safety and long-term efficacy outcome of PCI programs in centres without surgery on-site have been shown in registries and large randomised studies. Just recently, the MASS COMM investigators demonstrated in a large randomised trial including 3691 patients that there was no difference in the incidence of MACE at 30 days (9.5 % vs 9.4 %; RR 1.00; P < 0.001 for non-inferiority) and at 12 months (17.3 % vs 17.8 %; RR 0.98; P<0.001 for non-inferiority) [2]. These data confirm and extend the results from the CPORT study published in 2012, which randomised 18,867 patients and showed no difference in 6-week mortality and no difference in MACE at 9 months (12.1 % vs 11.2 %; P=0.05) [3]. Both these studies excluded patients undergoing urgent PCI procedures for STEMI and NSTEMI. Reports using non-randomised data from the NRMI database by Pride et al., which included 58,821 STEMI patients and more than 100,000 NSTEMI patients treated either in centres with or without surgery on-site confirmed that the safety (e.g., as assessed on the basis of short-term mortality and need for emergency surgery) and efficacy (e.g., procedural success and longer-term rate of survival) of such PCI procedures was similar [4, 5]. Following these developments, the Dutch Guidelines for Interventional Cardiology 2004 included recommendations for centres and operators that provide PCI without surgery on-site regarding facilities, staffing, training requirements etc [6]. The minimum number of procedures per centre and per operator are required in order to ensure proficiency, experience and continued quality of care. Moreover, structural relations with a surgical centre and protocols for emergency transfer should be present. In order to provide primary PCI for patients with STEMI, a 24–7 service is required and finally, centres are obliged to prospectively …
منابع مشابه
اثر PercutaneousCoronary Intervention Elective بر بهبودی نارسایی ایسکمیک میترال
Introdution: Ischemic mitral regurgitation (IMR) remains one of the most complex and unresolved aspects of ischemic heart disease that the impact of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) on improvement of intensity of ischemic mitral regurgitation is not well clarified. Patients with coronary artery diseases and ischemic mitral regurgitation have a worse prognosis than the patients with coro...
متن کاملThrombolytic therapy vs primary percutaneous coronary intervention for myocardial infarction in patients presenting to hospitals without on-site cardiac surgery: a randomized controlled trial.
CONTEXT Trials comparing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and thrombolytic therapy for treatment of acute myocardial infarction (MI) suggest primary PCI is the superior therapy, although they differ with respect to the durability of benefit. Because PCI is often limited to hospitals that have on-site cardiac surgery programs, most acute MI patients do not have access to this the...
متن کاملSimilar outcome of ST-elevation myocardial infarction patients treated with primary percutaneous coronary intervention regardless of presence of cardiac surgery on-site.
BACKGROUND The growing penetration of mechanical reperfusion in ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) has been achieved by the creation of new percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) centres which have helped to shorten delays but have compromised PCI volumes. AIM To compare the outcomes in STEMI patients treated in PCI centres with or without surgical back-up. METHODS Data concerning...
متن کاملPercutaneous coronary interventions in facilities without cardiac surgery on site.
Prior to the widespread adoption of intracoronary stent implantation, potential complications of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) necessitated the presence of backup cardiac surgery. However, as stent implantation has become the predominant form of PCI, the incidence of emergent cardiac surgery has declined exponentially. Despite this, current guidelines recommend against the performanc...
متن کاملPercutaneous Coronary Intervention for Left Main Coronary Artery Disease - A Single Hospital Experience without On-Site Cardiac Surgery.
BACKGROUND To investigate the safety and outcome of percutaneous coronary intervention for left main coronary artery disease in hospital without on-site cardiac surgery. METHODS Between January 2007 and December 2010, all patients diagnosed with left main coronary artery disease and refused coronary artery bypass graft surgery in our hospital or a tertiary center, were enrolled. Data includin...
متن کاملRisk factors of access site pain following coronary interventions through upper extremities
Introduction: Coronary artery disease (CAD) is recognized as the major cause of mortality and morbidity worldwide. Coronary artery interventions are considered the best therapeutic choice for most patients. Similar to other invasive procedures, these interventions whether performed from femoral or upper extremities have their own complications. There is a paucity of studies reg...
متن کاملذخیره در منابع من
با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید
عنوان ژورنال:
دوره 21 شماره
صفحات -
تاریخ انتشار 2013