+1 Recommend
1 collections
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found

      7,528 Patients Treated with PCI – A Scandinavian Real-Life Scenario

      Read this article at

          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.


          Aim: Analyze clinical, temporal and procedural characteristics from 7,528 consecutive percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) patients in one of the largest published contemporary European PCI-database during a 6-year period. Method: Retrospective study design. Period: 1998–2004. Temporal and referral changes in a Danish PCI-registry were analyzed. Demographic and angiographic variables were compared with data from randomized clinical trials, US-registries and current guidelines. Results: 22,214 patients were examined with coronary angiography and 7,528 patients were treated with PCI. The annual number of PCI’s increased by 15%. Over time, the fraction of patients with risk factors increased, median age increased from 61 to 64 years and the coronary pathology was significantly worsened. ST-elevation myocardial infarction patients primarily admitted to hospitals without facilities for primary angioplasty, were less likely to receive primary PCI. Baseline-data were in general in par with randomized clinical trial study populations and large-scale US data-registries. Interestingly, 14% of all PCI-procedures were performed on patients with a clinical presentation, for which coronary artery bypass grafting would be recommended by guidelines. Conclusion: PCI is performed in an increasingly sicker population, but generally in accordance with randomized trials and similar to US tradition. However, 14% were treated with PCI even though coronary artery bypass grafting was recommended by guidelines.

          Related collections

          Most cited references 23

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Primary angioplasty versus intravenous thrombolytic therapy for acute myocardial infarction: a quantitative review of 23 randomised trials.

          Many trials have been done to compare primary percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (PTCA) with thrombolytic therapy for acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (AMI). Our aim was to look at the combined results of these trials and to ascertain which reperfusion therapy is most effective. We did a search of published work and identified 23 trials, which together randomly assigned 7739 thrombolytic-eligible patients with ST-segment elevation AMI to primary PTCA (n=3872) or thrombolytic therapy (n=3867). Streptokinase was used in eight trials (n=1837), and fibrin-specific agents in 15 (n=5902). Most patients who received thrombolytic therapy (76%, n=2939) received a fibrin-specific agent. Stents were used in 12 trials, and platelet glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors were used in eight. We identified short-term and long-term clinical outcomes of death, non-fatal reinfarction, and stroke, and did subgroup analyses to assess the effect of type of thrombolytic agent used and the strategy of emergent hospital transfer for primary PTCA. All analyses were done with and without inclusion of the SHOCK trial data. Primary PTCA was better than thrombolytic therapy at reducing overall short-term death (7% [n=270] vs 9% [360]; p=0.0002), death excluding the SHOCK trial data (5% [199] vs 7% [276]; p=0.0003), non-fatal reinfarction (3% [80] vs 7% [222]; p<0.0001), stroke (1% [30] vs 2% [64]; p=0.0004), and the combined endpoint of death, non-fatal reinfarction, and stroke (8% [253] vs 14% [442]; p<0.0001). The results seen with primary PTCA remained better than those seen with thrombolytic therapy during long-term follow-up, and were independent of both the type of thrombolytic agent used, and whether or not the patient was transferred for primary PTCA. Primary PTCA is more effective than thrombolytic therapy for the treatment of ST-segment elevation AMI.
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Sirolimus-eluting stents versus standard stents in patients with stenosis in a native coronary artery.

            Preliminary reports of studies involving simple coronary lesions indicate that a sirolimus-eluting stent significantly reduces the risk of restenosis after percutaneous coronary revascularization. We conducted a randomized, double-blind trial comparing a sirolimus-eluting stent with a standard stent in 1058 patients at 53 centers in the United States who had a newly diagnosed lesion in a native coronary artery. The coronary disease in these patients was complex because of the frequent presence of diabetes (in 26 percent of patients), the high percentage of patients with longer lesions (mean, 14.4 mm), and small vessels (mean, 2.80 mm). The primary end point was failure of the target vessel (a composite of death from cardiac causes, myocardial infarction, and repeated percutaneous or surgical revascularization of the target vessel) within 270 days. The rate of failure of the target vessel was reduced from 21.0 percent with a standard stent to 8.6 percent with a sirolimus-eluting stent (P<0.001)--a reduction that was driven largely by a decrease in the frequency of the need for revascularization of the target lesion (16.6 percent in the standard-stent group vs. 4.1 percent in the sirolimus-stent group, P<0.001). The frequency of neointimal hyperplasia within the stent was also decreased in the group that received sirolimus-eluting stents, as assessed by both angiography and intravascular ultrasonography. Subgroup analyses revealed a reduction in the rates of angiographic restenosis and target-lesion revascularization in all subgroups examined. In this randomized clinical trial involving patients with complex coronary lesions, the use of a sirolimus-eluting stent had a consistent treatment effect, reducing the rates of restenosis and associated clinical events in all subgroups analyzed. Copyright 2003 Massachusetts Medical Society
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Percutaneous coronary angioplasty compared with exercise training in patients with stable coronary artery disease: a randomized trial.

              Regular exercise in patients with stable coronary artery disease has been shown to improve myocardial perfusion and to retard disease progression. We therefore conducted a randomized study to compare the effects of exercise training versus standard percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with stenting on clinical symptoms, angina-free exercise capacity, myocardial perfusion, cost-effectiveness, and frequency of a combined clinical end point (death of cardiac cause, stroke, CABG, angioplasty, acute myocardial infarction, and worsening angina with objective evidence resulting in hospitalization). A total of 101 male patients aged < or =70 years were recruited after routine coronary angiography and randomized to 12 months of exercise training (20 minutes of bicycle ergometry per day) or to PCI. Cost efficiency was calculated as the average expense (in US dollars) needed to improve the Canadian Cardiovascular Society class by 1 class. Exercise training was associated with a higher event-free survival (88% versus 70% in the PCI group, P=0.023) and increased maximal oxygen uptake (+16%, from 22.7+/-0.7 to 26.2+/-0.8 mL O2/kg, P<0.001 versus baseline, P<0.001 versus PCI group after 12 months). To gain 1 Canadian Cardiovascular Society class, 6956 dollars was spent in the PCI group versus 3429 dollars in the training group (P<0.001). Compared with PCI, a 12-month program of regular physical exercise in selected patients with stable coronary artery disease resulted in superior event-free survival and exercise capacity at lower costs, notably owing to reduced rehospitalizations and repeat revascularizations.

                Author and article information

                S. Karger AG
                April 2008
                31 October 2007
                : 110
                : 2
                : 96-105
                Cardiac Catheterisation Laboratory, Heart Clinic, aRigshospitalet and bKAS Gentofte, Copenhagen, Denmark
                110487 Cardiology 2008;110:96–105
                © 2007 S. Karger AG, Basel

                Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug. Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.

                Page count
                Figures: 6, Tables: 4, References: 35, Pages: 10
                Original Research


                Comment on this article