scholarly journals Multicentre Cohort Study of the Impact of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention on Patients With Concurrent Cancer and Ischaemic Heart Disease

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tatsuya Nishikawa ◽  
Toshitaka Morishima ◽  
Sumiyo Okawa ◽  
Yuki Fujii ◽  
Tomoyuki Otsuka ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Percutaneous Coronary Intervention ◽  
Heart Disease ◽  
Propensity Score ◽  
Confidence Interval ◽  
Cancer Diagnosis ◽  
Coronary Intervention ◽  
Percutaneous Coronary ◽  
Long Term Prognosis ◽  
Concurrent Cancer

Abstract Background: The incidence of concurrent cancer and ischaemic heart disease (IHD) is increasing; however, the long-term patient prognoses remain unclear.Methods: Five-year all-cause mortality data pertaining to patients in the Osaka Cancer Registry, who were diagnosed with colorectal, lung, prostate, and gastric cancers between 2010 and 2015, were retrieved and analysed together with linked patient administrative data. Patient characteristics (cancer type, stage, and treatment; coronary risk factors; medications; and time from cancer diagnosis to index admission for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or IHD diagnosis), were adjusted for propensity score matching. Three groups were identified: patients who underwent PCI within 3 years of cancer diagnosis (n=564, PCI+ group), patients diagnosed with IHD within 3 years of cancer diagnosis who did not undergo PCI (n=3058, PCI-/IHD+ group), and patients without IHD (n=27,392, PCI-/IHD- group). Kaplan-Meier analysis was used for comparisons. Results: After propensity score matching, the PCI+ group had better prognosis (n=489 in both groups, hazard ratio 0.64, 95% confidence interval 0.51–0.81, P<0.001) than the PCI-/IHD+ group. PCI+ patients (n=282) had significantly higher mortality than those without IHD (n=280 in each group, hazard ratio 2.88, 95% confidence interval 1.90–4.38, P<0.001). Conclusions: PCI might improve the long-term prognosis in cancer patients with IHD. However, these patients could have significantly worse long-term prognosis than cancer patients without IHD.

scholarly journals Multicentre cohort study of the impact of percutaneous coronary intervention on patients with concurrent cancer and ischaemic heart disease

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Tatsuya Nishikawa ◽  
Toshitaka Morishima ◽  
Sumiyo Okawa ◽  
Yuki Fujii ◽  
Tomoyuki Otsuka ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Percutaneous Coronary Intervention ◽  
Heart Disease ◽  
Propensity Score ◽  
Confidence Interval ◽  
Cancer Diagnosis ◽  
Coronary Intervention ◽  
Percutaneous Coronary ◽  
Long Term Prognosis ◽  
Concurrent Cancer

Abstract Background The incidence of concurrent cancer and ischaemic heart disease (IHD) is increasing; however, the long-term patient prognoses remain unclear. Methods Five-year all-cause mortality data pertaining to patients in the Osaka Cancer Registry, who were diagnosed with colorectal, lung, prostate, and gastric cancers between 2010 and 2015, were retrieved and analysed together with linked patient administrative data. Patient characteristics (cancer type, stage, and treatment; coronary risk factors; medications; and time from cancer diagnosis to index admission for percutaneous coronary intervention [PCI] or IHD diagnosis) were adjusted for propensity score matching. Three groups were identified: patients who underwent PCI within 3 years of cancer diagnosis (n = 564, PCI + group), patients diagnosed with IHD within 3 years of cancer diagnosis who did not undergo PCI (n = 3058, PCI-/IHD + group), and patients without IHD (n = 27,392, PCI-/IHD- group). Kaplan–Meier analysis was used for comparisons. Results After propensity score matching, the PCI + group had better prognosis (n = 489 in both groups, hazard ratio 0.64, 95% confidence interval 0.51–0.81, P < 0.001) than the PCI-/IHD + group. PCI + patients (n = 282) had significantly higher mortality than those without IHD (n = 280 in each group, hazard ratio 2.88, 95% confidence interval 1.90–4.38, P < 0.001). Conclusions PCI might improve the long-term prognosis in cancer patients with IHD. However, these patients could have significantly worse long-term prognosis than cancer patients without IHD. Since the present study has some limitations, further research will be needed on this important topic in cardio-oncology.

scholarly journals Long-Term Prognosis in Young Patients with Stable Coronary Disease: Ten-Year Follow-up of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

2012 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 161-165 ◽  
Author(s):  
Igor Ribeiro de Castro Bienert ◽  
Expedito E. Ribeiro ◽  
Luiz J. Kajita ◽  
Marco Antonio Perin ◽  
Carlos A.H. Campos ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Percutaneous Coronary Intervention ◽  
Coronary Disease ◽  
Young Patients ◽  
Coronary Intervention ◽  
Percutaneous Coronary ◽  
Long Term Prognosis

Abstract 4496: Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Stable Coronary Heart Disease: Value of Nt-Probnp for Stratification of Long-Term Risk

Circulation ◽  
2008 ◽  
Vol 118 (suppl_18) ◽  
Author(s):  
Pedro Carmo ◽  
Carlos Aguiar ◽  
Jorge Ferreira ◽  
Luis Raposo ◽  
Pedro Goncalves ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Coronary Heart Disease ◽  
Percutaneous Coronary Intervention ◽  
Heart Disease ◽  
Coronary Intervention ◽  
Inter Quartile Range ◽  
Quartile Range ◽  
Stable Coronary Heart Disease ◽  
Percutaneous Coronary

Purpose: N-terminal fragment of the B type-natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) is an established tool for assessing acute dyspnoea and stratifying risk in heart failure, acute coronary syndromes (ACS), and stable coronary heart disease (SCHD). The aim of this study was to determine the value of NT-proBNP in predicting long-term risk of patients (Pts) submitted to elective percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in the setting of SCHD. Methods: We prospectively studied 291 Pts (age 64.3±9.6 years, 64 female) with SCHD submitted to successful elective PCI, and determined NT-proBNP immediately before PCI. Pts were divided into 2 groups according to NT-proBNP level: group T3 formed by Pts with NT-proBNP level in the highest tertile and group T1+T2 formed by all remaining Pts. The study endpoint was time to the first occurrence of death (D) or non-fatal myocardial infarction (MI) during the mean follow-up of 568 ± 322 days. Multivariable analyses were performed to adjust the prognostic value of NT-proBNP for the effects of factors known to influence NT-proBNP (age, gender, renal function, body mass index) and of other potential predictors of outcome (cardiovascular risk factors, prior cardiovascular events, left ventricular ejection fraction, and PCI characteristics). Results: NT-proBNP ranged from 5 pg/ml to 104 pg/ml in the 1st tertile (T1), 105 pg/ml to 358 pg/ml in the 2nd tertile (T2), and 364 pg/ml to 33.991 pg/ml in the 3rd tertile (T3). During follow-up, 8 Pts died and 11 suffered a non-fatal MI. NT-proBNP was significantly higher in Pts who experienced an adverse outcome (440 pg/ml [inter-quartile range, 104 –1712] vs 174 pg/ml [inter-quartile range, 78 – 460) in Pts with uneventful follow-up; P= 0.007). An NT-proBNP level ≥364 pg/ml was associated with a higher endpoint rate (13.4% vs 3.1% in group T1+T2) and independently predicted outcome: adjusted hazard ratio 3.11, 95% CI, 1.15– 8.37, P=0.025. The sensitivity, specificity, predictive positive value, and negative predictive value for the criterion NT-proBNP ≥364 pg/ml were 68.4%, 69.1%, 13.4%, and 96.9%, respectively. Conclusion: In the setting of SCHD, the level of NT-proBNP is a powerful prognostic marker even after successful PCI.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document