The impact of on-site cardiac surgical backup on clinical outcomes of acute coronary syndrome-analysis of the ACSIS national registry.
CABG (Coronary artery bypass grafting surgery)
acute coronary syndrome
acute myocardal infarct
cardiac care
cardiac surgery
percutaneous coronary intervention
Journal
Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine
ISSN: 2297-055X
Titre abrégé: Front Cardiovasc Med
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101653388
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2023
2023
Historique:
received:
17
04
2023
accepted:
21
08
2023
medline:
20
9
2023
pubmed:
20
9
2023
entrez:
20
9
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The availability of advanced technologies for mechanical support in hospitals with on-site cardiac surgery (CS), along with the ability to perform urgent coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery, may result in improved clinical outcomes in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS). We conducted a retrospective analysis of the bi-annually Acute Coronary Syndrome Israeli Survey (ACSIS) registry from the year 2000 to 2020, performed in hospitals with and without CS. Mortality rates and major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) rates are reported. We evaluated two periods of the study-early (2000-2010) vs. late (2011-2020). Propensity score matching was performed to reduce bias between the two groups. The study included 16,979 patients (52.3% in the on-site CS group). Patients in the on-site CS group were more likely to undergo percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), (odds ratio [OR], 1.26 [95% CI, 1.18-1.35]; The availability of on-site CS resulted in variations in treatment modality, yet it did not affect the clinical outcomes of ACS. A trend to a better short-term outcomes was noted in hospitals without CS during the late period of the study, which warrants further investigation.
Sections du résumé
Background
UNASSIGNED
The availability of advanced technologies for mechanical support in hospitals with on-site cardiac surgery (CS), along with the ability to perform urgent coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery, may result in improved clinical outcomes in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS).
Methods
UNASSIGNED
We conducted a retrospective analysis of the bi-annually Acute Coronary Syndrome Israeli Survey (ACSIS) registry from the year 2000 to 2020, performed in hospitals with and without CS. Mortality rates and major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) rates are reported. We evaluated two periods of the study-early (2000-2010) vs. late (2011-2020). Propensity score matching was performed to reduce bias between the two groups.
Results
UNASSIGNED
The study included 16,979 patients (52.3% in the on-site CS group). Patients in the on-site CS group were more likely to undergo percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), (odds ratio [OR], 1.26 [95% CI, 1.18-1.35];
Conclusions
UNASSIGNED
The availability of on-site CS resulted in variations in treatment modality, yet it did not affect the clinical outcomes of ACS. A trend to a better short-term outcomes was noted in hospitals without CS during the late period of the study, which warrants further investigation.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37727307
doi: 10.3389/fcvm.2023.1207473
pmc: PMC10505675
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
1207473Informations de copyright
© 2023 Moady, Ovdat, Rubinshtein, Eitan, Daud, Arow and Atar.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Références
JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2022 Apr 25;15(8):876-886
pubmed: 35450687
Circulation. 2018 Nov 13;138(20):e618-e651
pubmed: 30571511
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2019 Sep 24;74(12):1618-1636
pubmed: 31537272
Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2021 Jan;14(1):e009697
pubmed: 33354988
Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2009 Dec;2(6):519-27
pubmed: 20031769
J Card Surg. 2019 Oct;34(10):1049-1054
pubmed: 31389634
Eur Heart J. 2021 Apr 7;42(14):1289-1367
pubmed: 32860058
JAMA Netw Open. 2020 Sep 1;3(9):e2018150
pubmed: 32975572
J Am Heart Assoc. 2020 Jun 2;9(11):e015317
pubmed: 32456522
Circulation. 2011 May 31;123(21):2344-52
pubmed: 21576654
Am J Cardiol. 2019 Jan 1;123(1):25-32
pubmed: 30360891
Am J Cardiol. 2018 Sep 15;122(6):929-935
pubmed: 30057234
J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2018 Mar;155(3):865-873.e3
pubmed: 29452484
N Engl J Med. 2012 May 10;366(19):1792-802
pubmed: 22443460
Circulation. 2015 Aug 4;132(5):388-401
pubmed: 26152708
EuroIntervention. 2022 Mar 18;17(16):1318-1329
pubmed: 34602385
J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2020 Oct;160(4):926-935.e6
pubmed: 31653430
Lancet Glob Health. 2019 Jun;7(6):e748-e760
pubmed: 31028013
Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2019 May;12(5):e007812
pubmed: 31010297
Heart Lung Circ. 2018 Feb;27(2):175-182
pubmed: 28325709
J Am Heart Assoc. 2021 Sep 21;10(18):e021182
pubmed: 34514809
J Am Heart Assoc. 2020 Feb 4;9(3):e014477
pubmed: 31973608
Int J Cardiol. 2013 Jul 15;167(1):197-204
pubmed: 22240768
J Am Heart Assoc. 2014 Jul 28;3(4):
pubmed: 25074695
EuroIntervention. 2021 Jun 25;17(3):193-201
pubmed: 34167938
Sci Rep. 2020 Mar 9;10(1):4315
pubmed: 32152400
J Am Heart Assoc. 2022 Apr 5;11(7):e024040
pubmed: 35350870
JAMA. 2011 Dec 14;306(22):2487-94
pubmed: 22166608
Circulation. 2018 May 15;137(20):2128-2138
pubmed: 29386204
J Cardiol. 2017 Jan;69(1):103-109
pubmed: 26928574
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2012 Oct 16;60(16):1581-98
pubmed: 22958960
JAMA Cardiol. 2017 Jan 1;2(1):25-33
pubmed: 27893054