Abstract 14873: Is There Difference in Clinical Outcomes Following Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (PCI) for Acute Coronary Syndrome (ACS) between Hospitals With and Without Onsite Cardiac Surgery Backup?

Abstract

Background: Based on 2011 ACCF/AHA/SCAI PCI guideline, it is recommended that PCI should be performed at hospital with onsite cardiac surgery. But, recent data suggests that there is no significant difference in clinical outcomes following primary or elective PCI between hospitals with and without onsite cardiac surgery. The proportion of PCI centers without onsite cardiac surgery comprises approximately more than half of all PCI centers in Japan. We examined the impact of with or without onsite cardiac surgery on clinical outcomes following PCI to ACS. Methods: From Aug 2008 to March 2011, subjects (n=2288) were enrolled from the Kumamoto Intervention Conference Study (KICS), which is a multicenter registry, and enrolling consecutive patients undergoing PCI in 15 centers in Japan. Patients were assigned to two groups treated in hospitals with (n=1954) or without (n=334) onsite cardiac surgery. Clinical events were followed up for 12 months. Primary endpoint was in-hospital death, cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, and stroke. And we monitored other events those were non-cardiovascular deaths, bleeding complications, revascularizations, and emergent CABG. Results: There was no overall significant difference in primary endpoint between hospitals with and without onsite cardiac surgery (9.6%vs9.5%; P=0.737). There was also no significant difference when events in primary endpoint were considered separately. In other events, only revascularization was more frequently seen in hospitals with onsite cardiac surgery (22.1%vs12.9%; P<0.001). Kaplan-Meier analysis for primary endpoint showed that there was no significant difference between two groups (Log Rank P=0.943). By cox proportional hazards model analysis for primary endpoint, without onsite cardiac surgery was not a predictive factor for primary endpoint (HR 0.969, 95%CI 0.704-1.333; P=0.845). We performed propensity score matching analysis to correct for the disparate patient numbers between two groups, and there was also no significant difference for primary endpoint (6.9% vs 8.0%; P=0.544). Conclusions: There is no significant difference in clinical outcomes following PCI for ACS between hospitals with and without onsite cardiac surgery backup in Japan.