Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2010 Oct;11(10):783-8.

[Feasibility and safety of immediately returning patients transferred for percutaneous coronary intervention in a large metropolitan area]

[Article in Italian]
Affiliations
  • PMID: 21246782
Comparative Study

[Feasibility and safety of immediately returning patients transferred for percutaneous coronary intervention in a large metropolitan area]

[Article in Italian]
Fabrizio Tomai et al. G Ital Cardiol (Rome). 2010 Oct.

Abstract

Background: Hospitals without percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) capabilities are used to transfer patients who need coronary angiography and/or PCI to other centers. In order to optimize economic resources and hospital bed management, PCIs might be performed with an in-service organization, with re-transfer to the community hospital immediately after the procedure. The aim of our study was to evaluate the safety of a consecutive, unselected series of in-service PCIs compared to PCIs performed in patients admitted to hospitals with cath-lab capabilities.

Methods: During 2008, 1030 PCI procedures were performed at the European Hospital and Aurelia Hospital: 905 in patients admitted to a hospital with PCI capabilities (Group I) and 125 (12%) with an in-service strategy (Group II) referring from the Città di Roma Hospital. All treatment protocols were preventively uniformed and standardized.

Results: The two groups were statistically comparable in terms of baseline clinical characteristics and/or procedural findings, with the exception for older age (66 +/- 10 vs 70 +/- 10 years, p = 0.004) and a higher prevalence of acute coronary syndromes (56 vs 88%, p < 0.001) and femoral vascular access (94 vs 98%, p = 0.03) in Group II. The rate of left ventricular ejection fraction < or = 35% (20 vs 13%, p = 0.06), multivessel PCI (23 vs 19%, p = 0.4), and glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitor use (15 vs 13%, p = 0.5) was similar between the two groups. Among patients treated with an in-service strategy, 2 (1.6%) were not transferred to the community hospital, because of hemodynamic instability. The in-hospital rate of major clinical events (death for cardiovascular causes, cerebrovascular events, urgent revascularization, stent thrombosis) was 0.75% and 0.8% (p = 0.8), 1.8% and 1% (p = 0.4) for periprocedural myocardial infarction, 1.7% and 1.9% (p = 0.5) for major bleeding, 1.1% and 1.6% (p = 0.6) for vascular complications, in Group I and II, respectively. Left ventricular dysfunction was the only independent predictor of major clinical events (p = 0.003).

Conclusions: A strategy of in-service organization for PCI presents a similar rate of in-hospital clinical events and complications compared to an overnight stay into a hospital with PCI capabilities. Such a strategy may be utilized in order to optimize economic resources and hospital bed management.

PubMed Disclaimer

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources