Follow-up strategies and individual risk profile after percutaneous coronary intervention: The prospective post percutaneous coronary intervention registry.
HCP
PCI
RISK
Journal
Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions
ISSN: 1522-726X
Titre abrégé: Catheter Cardiovasc Interv
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 100884139
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 02 2021
01 02 2021
Historique:
received:
29
01
2020
revised:
03
04
2020
accepted:
25
04
2020
pubmed:
10
5
2020
medline:
25
9
2021
entrez:
9
5
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
A multidisciplinary consensus document (MCD) provided a follow-up strategy after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) based on individual risk profiles: A, high; B, intermediate; and C, low. To assess patterns of follow-up after PCI and to evaluate the potential reduction of cardiologic examinations with the application of the MCD. The post-PCI registry was carried out at 31 Italian Hospitals and included consecutive patients undergoing PCI. We collected cardiologic consults (CC), noninvasive stress tests (ST), and echocardiograms (EC) actually performed at 12 months and we compared them with the expected by the MCD. We included 1,113 patients (58% with acute coronary syndrome) that underwent 1,567 CC, 398 ST, and 612 EC. The performed CC and ST were significantly lower compared to the expected, respectively [1.6 (95% CI, 1.5-1.7) vs. 1.9 (95% CI, 1.8-2.0), and 0.40 (95% CI, 0.4-0.5) vs. 0.61 (95% CI, 0.6-0.7), p < .001]; the performed EC were significantly higher [0.6 (95% CI, 0.6-0.7) vs. 0.3 (95% CI, 0.3-0.37), p < .001]. Patients at moderate low risk had an excess of noninvasive tests whereas patients at higher risk received less examinations than the expected. The individual risk profile was an independent predictor of increased number of cardiac examination in patients at intermediate and low risk [profile B, OR 2.56 (95%CI 1.38-4.75); profile C, OR 27.00 (95%CI 8.13-89.62), p < .001]. In real world patients undergoing PCI, the intensity of follow-up at 12 months appeared not based on individual risk profile, with a higher numbers of examinations, particularly EC, performed in low risk subjects.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
A multidisciplinary consensus document (MCD) provided a follow-up strategy after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) based on individual risk profiles: A, high; B, intermediate; and C, low.
AIM
To assess patterns of follow-up after PCI and to evaluate the potential reduction of cardiologic examinations with the application of the MCD.
METHODS
The post-PCI registry was carried out at 31 Italian Hospitals and included consecutive patients undergoing PCI. We collected cardiologic consults (CC), noninvasive stress tests (ST), and echocardiograms (EC) actually performed at 12 months and we compared them with the expected by the MCD.
RESULTS
We included 1,113 patients (58% with acute coronary syndrome) that underwent 1,567 CC, 398 ST, and 612 EC. The performed CC and ST were significantly lower compared to the expected, respectively [1.6 (95% CI, 1.5-1.7) vs. 1.9 (95% CI, 1.8-2.0), and 0.40 (95% CI, 0.4-0.5) vs. 0.61 (95% CI, 0.6-0.7), p < .001]; the performed EC were significantly higher [0.6 (95% CI, 0.6-0.7) vs. 0.3 (95% CI, 0.3-0.37), p < .001]. Patients at moderate low risk had an excess of noninvasive tests whereas patients at higher risk received less examinations than the expected. The individual risk profile was an independent predictor of increased number of cardiac examination in patients at intermediate and low risk [profile B, OR 2.56 (95%CI 1.38-4.75); profile C, OR 27.00 (95%CI 8.13-89.62), p < .001].
CONCLUSION
In real world patients undergoing PCI, the intensity of follow-up at 12 months appeared not based on individual risk profile, with a higher numbers of examinations, particularly EC, performed in low risk subjects.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
E209-E218Informations de copyright
© 2020 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
Références
Barbato E, Dudek D, Baumbach A, Windecker S, Haude M. EAPCI registries: a first step towards systematic monitoring of European interventional cardiology practice. EuroIntervention. 2017;13(Z):Z6-Z7.
Shah BR, Cowper PA, O'Brien SM, et al. Patterns of cardiac stress testing after revascularization in community practice. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2010;56:1328-1334.
Hlatky MA, DeMaria AN. Does practice variation matter? J Am Coll Cardiol. 2013;62:447-448.
Neumann FJ, Sousa-Uva M, Ahlsson A, et al. 2018 ESC/EACTS guidelines on myocardial revascularization. Eur Heart J. 2019;40:87-165.
Knuuti J, Wijns W, Saraste A, et al. 2019 ESC guidelines for the diagnosis and management of chronic coronary syndromes. Eur Heart J. 2020;41:407-477. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehz425.
Rossini R, Oltrona Visconti L, Musumeci G, et al. A multidisciplinary consensus document on follow-up strategies for patients treated with percutaneous coronary intervention. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2015;85:E129-E139.
Levine GN, Bates ER, Blankenship JC, et al. 2011 ACCF/AHA/SCAI guideline for percutaneous coronary intervention: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association task force on practice guidelines and the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions. Circulation. 2011;124:e574-e651.
Windecker S, Kolh P, Alfonso F, et al. 2014 ESC/EACTS guidelines on myocardial revascularization: the task force on myocardial revascularization of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS). Developed with the special contribution of the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI). Eur Heart J. 2014;35:2541-2619.
Thygesen K, Alpert JS, White HD. Universal definition of myocardial infarction. Eur Heart J. 2007;28:2525-2538.
Vora AN, Peterson ED, McCoy LA, et al. Factors associated with initial prasugrel versus clopidogrel selection for patients with acute myocardial infarction undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: insights from the treatment with ADP receptors inhibitors: longitudinal assessment of treatment patterns and events after acute coronary syndrome (TRANSLATE-ACS) study. J Am Heart Assoc. 2016;5:e003946.
Lucas FL, DeLorenzo MA, Siewers AE, Wennberg DE. Temporal trends in the utilization of diagnostic testing and treatments for cardiovascular disease in the United States, 1993-2001. Circulation. 2006;113:374-379.
Jernberg T, Hasvold P, Henriksson M, Hjelm H, Thuresson M, Janzon M. Cardiovascular risk in post-myocardial infarction patients: nationwide real world data demonstrate the importance of a long-term perspective. Eur Heart J. 2015;36:1163-1170. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehu505.
Eisenberg MJ, Schechter D, Lefkovits J, et al. Use of routine functional testing after percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty: results from the ROSETTA registry. Am Heart J. 2001;141:837-846.
Mazzarotto P, Pristipino C, Burzotta F, et al. The use of functional tests and planned coronary angiography after percutaneous coronary revascularization in clinical practice. Results from the AFTER multicenter study. Int J Cardiol. 2009;137:151-157.
Lettieri C, Colombo P, Rosiello R, et al. Il follow-up del paziente sottoposto a rivascolarizzazione coronarica percutanea: impatto potenziale dell'applicazione di un percorso clinico-gestionale strutturato sull'integrazione ospedale-territorio e modulato sul rischio clinico del paziente. G Ital Cardiol. 2015;16:565-573.
Mudrick DW, Shah BR, McCoy LA, et al. Patterns of stress testing and diagnostic catheterization after coronary stenting in 250 350 medicare beneficiaries. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging. 2013;6:11-19.
Douglas PS, Khandheria B, Stainback RF, et al. ACCF/ASE/ACEP/ASNC/SCAI/SCCT/SCMR 2007 appropriateness criteria for transthoracic and transesophageal echocardiography: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation quality strategic directions committee appropriateness criteria working group, American Society of Echocardiography, American College of Emergency Physicians, American Society of Nuclear Cardiology, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography, and the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance endorsed by the American College of Chest Physicians and the Society of Critical Care Medicine. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2007;50:187-204.
Willens HJ, Gomez-Marin O, Heldman A, et al. Adherence to appropriateness criteria for transthoracic echocardiography: comparisons between a regional department of Veterans Affairs health care system and academic practice and between physicians and mid-level providers. J Am Soc Echocardiogr. 2009;22:793-799.
Shah BR, Cowper PA, O'Brien SM, et al. Association between physician billing and cardiac stress testing patterns following coronary revascularization. JAMA. 2011;306:1993-2000.
Jha AK, Perlin JB, Kizer KW, Dudley RA. Effect of the transformation of the veterans affairs health care system on the quality of care. N Engl J Med. 2003;348:2218-2227.
Sorum PC, Shim J, Chasseigne G, Bonnin-Scaon S, Cogneau J, Mullet E. Why do primary care physicians in the United States and France order prostate-specific antigen tests for asymptomatic patients? Med Decis Making. 2003;23:301-313.
Petersen LA, Normand SL, Leape LL, McNeil BJ. Regionalization and the underuse of angiography in the veterans affairs health care system as compared with a fee-for-service system. N Engl J Med. 2003;348:2209-2217.
Pilgrim T, Vranckx P, Valgimigli M, et al. Risk and timing of recurrent ischemic events among patients with stable ischemic heart disease, non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome, and ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. Am Heart J. 2016;175:56-65.
Chew DS, Wilton SB, Kavanagh K, et al. Left ventricular ejection fraction reassessment post-myocardial infarction: current clinical practice and determinants of adverse remodeling. Am Heart J. 2018;198:91-96.
Yeh RW, Kereiakes DJ, Steg PG, et al. Benefits and risks of extended duration dual antiplatelet therapy after PCI in patients with and without acute myocardial infarction. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2015;65:2211-2221.
Gargiulo G, Valgimigli M, Capodanno D, Bittl JA. State of the art: duration of dual antiplatelet therapy after percutaneous coronary intervention and coronary stent implantation - past, present and future perspectives. EuroIntervention. 2017;13:717-733.
Mehran R, Baber U, Steg PG, et al. Cessation of dual antiplatelet treatment and cardiac events after percutaneous coronary intervention (PARIS): 2 year results from a prospective observational study. Lancet. 2013;382:1714-1722.
Piccolo R, Bonaa KH, Efthimiou O, et al. Drug-eluting or bare-metal stents for percutaneous coronary intervention: a systematic review and individual patient data meta-analysis of randomised clinical trials. Lancet. 2019;393:2503-2510.
Lucas FL, Wennberg DE, Malenka DJ. Variation in the use of echocardiography. Eff Clin Pract. 1999;2:71-75.