Abstract

Many studies have compared outcomes for incomplete revascularization (IR) among patients undergoing percutaneous coronary interventions (PCIs), but little is known about the correlates of IR, the extent to which complete revascularization (CR) was attempted unsuccessfully, and the variation across operators in the use of IR.New York's PCI registry was used to examine medium-term mortality for IR, the variables associated with the use of IR, and the variation across operators in the utilization of IR after controlling for patient factors.Incomplete revascularization occurred for 63% of all patients and was significantly associated with higher 3-year mortality (adjusted hazard ratio 1.35, 95% CI 1.23-1.48) than for CR. A total of 96% of all attempted CRs were successful. Operators with 15 or fewer years in practice (the lowest half) used IR significantly more (65% vs 61%, adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 1.17, 95% CI 1.00-1.37) than other operators, and operators with annual volumes of 171 or lower (the lowest 3 quartiles) used IR more than other operators (68% vs 60%, AOR 1.35, 95% CI 1.14-1.59). Also, hospitals with annual volumes of 645 and lower (the lowest 50% of hospitals) used IR more (67% vs 62%, AOR 1.46, 95% CI 1.07-1.99) than other hospitals.Percutaneous coronary intervention patients without myocardial infarction who undergo IR continue to have higher medium-term (3-year) risk-adjusted mortality rates. There is a large amount of variability among operators in the frequency with which IR occurs. Operators who have been in practice longer, and higher-volume operators and hospitals have lower rates of IR. Failed attempts at CR occur very infrequently.

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.