EXPEDITED REVIEW
A Total of 1,007 Percutaneous Coronary Interventions Without Onsite Cardiac Surgery
Acute and Long-Term Outcomes
Henry H. Ting, MD, MBA, FACC*,*,
Ganesh Raveendran, MD*,
Ryan J. Lennon, MS ,
Kirsten Hall Long, PhD ,
Mandeep Singh, MBBS, FACC*,
Douglas L. Wood, MD, FACC*,
Bernard J. Gersh, MB, ChB, DPhil, FACC*,
Charanjit S. Rihal, MD, MBA, FACC* and
David R. Holmes, Jr, MD, FACC*
* Division of Cardiovascular Diseases
Department of Health Sciences Research, Division of Biostatistics
Department of Health Sciences Research, Division of Health Care Policy and Research, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
Manuscript received January 3, 2006;
revised manuscript received January 31, 2006,
accepted February 17, 2006.
* Reprint requests and correspondence: Dr. Henry H. Ting, Division of Cardiovascular Diseases, Mayo Clinic, 200 First Street SW, Rochester, Minnesota 55905 (Email: ting.henry{at}mayo.edu).
OBJECTIVES: We sought to compare clinical outcomes of elective percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and primary PCI for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) at a community hospital without onsite cardiac surgery to those at a tertiary center with onsite cardiac surgery.
BACKGROUND: Disagreement exists about whether hospitals with cardiac catheterization laboratories, but without onsite cardiac surgery, should develop PCI programs. Primary PCI for STEMI at hospitals without onsite cardiac surgery have achieved satisfactory outcomes; however, elective PCI outcomes are not well defined.
METHODS: A total of 1,007 elective PCI and primary PCI procedures performed from March 1999 to August 2005 at the Immanuel St. Joseph's Hospital–Mayo Health System (ISJ) in Mankato, Minnesota, were matched one-to-one with those performed at St. Mary's Hospital (SMH) in Rochester, Minnesota. Strict protocols were followed for case selection and PCI program requirements. Clinical outcomes (in-hospital procedural success, death, any myocardial infarction, Q-wave myocardial infarction, and emergency coronary artery bypass surgery) and follow-up survival were compared between groups.
RESULTS: Among 722 elective PCIs, procedural success was 97% at ISJ compared with 95% at SMH (p = 0.046). Among 285 primary PCIs for STEMI, procedural success was 93% at ISJ and 96% at SMH (p = 0.085). No patients at ISJ undergoing PCI required emergent transfer for cardiac surgery. Survival at two years' follow-up by treatment location was similar for patients with elective PCI and primary PCI.
CONCLUSIONS: Similar clinical outcomes for elective PCI and primary PCI were achieved at a community hospital without onsite cardiac surgery compared with those at a tertiary center with onsite cardiac surgery using a prospective, rigorous protocol for case selection and PCI program requirements.
|
Abbreviations and Acronyms
| | ACC = American College of Cardiology | | AHA = American Heart Association | | CABG = coronary artery bypass surgery | | CI = confidence interval | | ISJ = Immanuel St. Joseph's Hospital–Mayo Health System | | MI = myocardial infarction | | PCI = percutaneous coronary intervention | | SMH = St. Mary's Hospital | | STEMI = ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction | | TVR = target vessel revascularization |
|
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
|
|
 
Y. B. Pride, J. G. Canto, P. D. Frederick, C. M. Gibson, and for the NRMI Investigators
Outcomes Among Patients With ST-Segment-Elevation Myocardial Infarction Presenting to Interventional Hospitals With and Without On-Site Cardiac Surgery
Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes,
November 1, 2009;
2(6):
574 - 582.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
G. J. Dehmer and R. G. Brindis
Non-ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction Treated at Hospitals With and Without On-Site Cardiac Surgery: What Is the Important Point?
J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. Intv.,
October 1, 2009;
2(10):
953 - 955.
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. A. Kutcher, L. W. Klein, F.-S. Ou, T. P. Wharton Jr, G. J. Dehmer, M. Singh, H. V. Anderson, J. S. Rumsfeld, W. S. Weintraub, R. E. Shaw, et al.
Percutaneous Coronary Interventions in Facilities Without Cardiac Surgery On Site: A Report From the National Cardiovascular Data Registry (NCDR).
J. Am. Coll. Cardiol.,
June 30, 2009;
54(1):
16 - 24.
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. Singh, B. J. Gersh, R. J. Lennon, H. H. Ting, D. R. Holmes Jr, B. J. Doyle, and C. S. Rihal
Outcomes of a System-Wide Protocol for Elective and Nonelective Coronary Angioplasty at Sites Without On-site Surgery: The Mayo Clinic Experience
Mayo Clin. Proc.,
June 1, 2009;
84(6):
501 - 508.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
P. C. Austin
Primer on Statistical Interpretation or Methods Report Card on Propensity-Score Matching in the Cardiology Literature From 2004 to 2006: A Systematic Review
Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes,
September 1, 2008;
1(1):
62 - 67.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
T. J. Kiernan, H. H. Ting, and B. J. Gersh
Facilitated percutaneous coronary intervention: current concepts, promises, and pitfalls
Eur. Heart J.,
July 1, 2007;
28(13):
1545 - 1553.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. A de Belder
On-site surgical standby for percutaneous coronary intervention: a thing of the past?
Heart,
March 1, 2007;
93(3):
281 - 283.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. Carlsson, S. N James, E. Stahle, S. Hofer, and B. Lagerqvist
Outcome of percutaneous coronary intervention in hospitals with and without on-site cardiac surgery standby
Heart,
March 1, 2007;
93(3):
335 - 338.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. A. Bittl
Reply
J. Am. Coll. Cardiol.,
July 18, 2006;
48(2):
416 - 416.
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
PCI Without On-Site Cardiac Surgery
Journal Watch Cardiology,
May 25, 2006;
2006(525):
1 - 1.
[Full Text]
|
|
|
|
