scholarly journals Clinical Outcomes of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Octogenarians

2018 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 121-125
Author(s):  
Mohammad Arifur Rahman ◽  
Afzalur Rahman ◽  
Syed Nasir Uddin ◽  
Md AKM Monwarul Islam ◽  
Tariq Ahmed Chowdhury ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Percutaneous Coronary Intervention ◽  
Interventional Procedure ◽  
Coronary Intervention ◽  
The Elderly ◽  
Left Ventricular ◽  
Study Endpoint ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Repeat Revascularization ◽  
Percutaneous Coronary ◽  
Emergency Revascularization

Background: Octogenarians are high risk patients and largely under-represented in clinical trials. The use of evidence-based therapy is, therefore, lower in this age group, resulting in a reliance on non-evidence based decision making. The elderly usually have higher prevalence of co morbidities and more often experience complications during and after revascularization procedures.Methods: 212 patients with ischemic heart disease who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) were divided into 2 groups according to age: ³80 years (n = 74) and < 80 years (n = 138). Baseline clinical characteristics, indications for coronary intervention, in hospital outcomes and 1 year outcome were obtained. Study endpoint was in hospital outcome (Renal impairment, MI, LVF, emergency revascularization, death) & 1 year follow up for myocardial infarction (MI), repeat revascularization and death.Results: Procedural success (TIMI III) were high in both groups, but still lower in the elderly as compared to younger group (95% vs. 97%, p=0.65).The elderly had higher incidence of post PCI bleeding, contrast induced nephropathy (CIN), MI, left ventricular failure (LVF) and death (9.5% vs.6.1%, 8.2% vs.3.7%, 6.8% vs.5.8%, 9.5% vs. 5.1% and 5.4%vs.3.6%, p=0.07). Whereas emergency revascularization were higher in younger group (5.4% vs. 6.5%, p=0.07). At 1 year MI and death were higher in elderly group (9.5% vs.6.5%, 6.8% vs.6.5% p=0.66), whereas repeat revascularization were higher in younger group (6.8% vs.8%, p= 0.66).Conclusion: Though immediate interventional procedure related complications are more in octogenarians, long term outcomes seem to be promising & comparable with younger counterparts.Cardiovasc. j. 2018; 10(2): 121-125

scholarly journals In-hospital Outcome of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention among Very Elderly Patients with Ischemic Heart Disease in a Dedicated Cardiac Hospital

2020 ◽  
Vol 35 (1) ◽  
pp. 61-65
Author(s):  
Mohammad Arifur Rahman ◽  
Afzalur Rahman ◽  
Mohammd Mahbubur Rahman ◽  
Farhana Ahmed ◽  
Md Kamrul Hasan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Percutaneous Coronary Intervention ◽  
Heart Disease ◽  
Elderly Patients ◽  
Ischemic Heart Disease ◽  
Coronary Intervention ◽  
The Elderly ◽  
Very Elderly ◽  
Percutaneous Coronary ◽  
Procedural Success ◽  
Emergency Revascularization

Background: Cardiovascular disease, and ischemic heart disease (IHD), is a major cause of morbidity and mortality in the very elderly patients (>80 years) worldwide. These patients represent a rapidly growing cohort presenting for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), now constituting more than one in five patients treated with PCI in real-world practice. Furthermore, they often have greater ischemic burden than their younger counterparts, suggesting that they have greater scope of benefit from coronary revascularization therapy. The elderly usually has higher prevalence of co morbidities and more often experience complications during and after revascularization procedures. Our aim was to evaluate clinical outcomes of PCI in patients older than 80 years, compared to their younger counterparts. Materials and methods: From July 2017 to July 2018 we included 212 patients with IHD purposively in Cardiology department of National Institute of Cardiovascular Diseases undergone PCI who were divided into 2 groups according to age: e” 80 years (n = 74) and < 80 years (n = 138). Baseline clinical characteristics, indications for coronary intervention, in hospital outcomes were obtained. Study endpoint were Renal impairment, MI, LVF, emergency revascularization and death. Results: Very elderly patients were more frequently male (86%) and nonsmoker at present (41% vs. 63%, p=0.003), had higher prevalence of hypertension (60% vs. 50%, p<0.13), and more often presented with NSTEMI (54% vs. 23%, p<0.001). Elderly group had higher incidence of TVD and LM disease (36% vs. 26% and 9.5% vs. 2.9%, p=0.07) and more incidence of ostial (16.2% vs.5.1%,p=0.007) and calcified lesions (31.1% vs. 14.5%, p=0.004). Procedural success (TIMI III) were high in both groups, but still lower in the elderly as compared to younger group (95% vs. 97%, p=0.65). Very elderly patients had higher incidence of post PCI bleeding, CIN, MI, LVF and death (9.5% vs.6.1%, 8.2% vs.3.7%, 6.8% vs.5.8%, 9.5% vs. 5.1% and 5.4%vs.3.6%,p=0.07), whereas emergency revascularization were higher in younger group (5.4% vs. 6.5%, p=0.07). Conclusion: Very elderly patients aged ≥80 years face more vascular site complications during PCI, usually have more LM and TVD with more ostial and calcified lesions in comparison with younger group. Though procedural success is similar with younger group, they face more post PCI CIN, LVF and MI. Repeat revascularization was higher in younger group. Bangladesh Heart Journal 2020; 35(1) : 61-65

Impact of Polypharmacy on Adherence to Evidence-Based Medication in Patients who Underwent Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

2016 ◽  
Vol 14 (4) ◽  
pp. 388-393 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shaban Mohammed ◽  
Abdulrahaman Arabi ◽  
Ayman El-Menyar ◽  
Sabir Abdulkarim ◽  
Amer AlJundi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Percutaneous Coronary Intervention ◽  
Coronary Intervention ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Percutaneous Coronary

Pentraxin Level is the Key to Determine Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (PCI) or Fibrinolysis

2019 ◽  
Vol 19 (2) ◽  
pp. 160-168 ◽  
Author(s):  
Habib Haybar ◽  
Saeed Alipour Parsa ◽  
Isa Khaheshi ◽  
Zeinab Deris Zayeri
Keyword(s):  
Percutaneous Coronary Intervention ◽  
Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention ◽  
Coronary Intervention ◽  
Left Ventricular ◽  
Relative Advantage ◽  
Left Ventricular Ejection ◽  
Percutaneous Coronary ◽  
Ptx3 Level ◽  
Tertiary Center ◽  
Functional Advantage

<P>Aims: To examine if pentraxin can help identify patients benefitting most from primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (PCI) vs. fibrinolysis. </P><P> Methods: Patients with acute ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction (STEMI) were consecutively recruited from a community center without PCI and a tertiary center with PCI facilities. Left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) was determined echocardiographically at baseline and 5 days after the index admission; the difference between two measurements was considered as the magnitude of improvement. We used regression models to test the hypothesis that the magnitude of the advantage of PCI over fibrinolysis in preserving LVEF 5 days after STEMI is modified by pentraxin 3 (PTX3). </P><P> Results: The functional advantage (LVEF) of the PCI over fibrinolysis has been determined by PTX3. LVEF was attenuated and even reversed as PTX3 level increased. The primary PCI of the participants with less than 7 ng.ml-1 PTX3 level, achieved a clinically significant increase in the LVEF as compared to fibrinolysis. At lower levels of PTX3, PCI shows a conspicuous advantage over fibrinolysis in terms of the probability of developing an LVEF <40%. </P><P> Conclusion: We demonstrated not only the functional advantage of PCI over fibrinolysis performed within the recommended time frames but also the relative advantage of its relevance to the baseline PTX3 levels. PTX3 can play a role in determining the choice of best therapy. More than 75% of patients with STEMI who have PTX3 levels ≤7 ng.ml-1 imply the need of PCI.</P>

scholarly journals Differing effects of beta-blockers on long-term clinical outcomes following percutaneous coronary intervention between patients with mid-range and reduced left ventricular ejection fraction

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jun Shitara ◽  
Ryo Naito ◽  
Takatoshi Kasai ◽  
Hirohisa Endo ◽  
Hideki Wada ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Percutaneous Coronary Intervention ◽  
Ejection Fraction ◽  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Beta Blockers ◽  
Coronary Intervention ◽  
Left Ventricular ◽  
Left Ventricular Ejection ◽  
Coronary Syndrome ◽  
Percutaneous Coronary

Abstract Background The aim of this study was to determine the difference in effects of beta-blockers on long-term clinical outcomes between ischemic heart disease (IHD) patients with mid-range ejection fraction (mrEF) and those with reduced ejection fraction (rEF). Methods Data were assessed of 3508 consecutive IHD patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) between 1997 and 2011. Among them, 316 patients with mrEF (EF = 40–49%) and 201 patients with rEF (EF < 40%) were identified. They were assigned to groups according to users and non-users of beta-blockers and effects of beta-blockers were assessed between mrEF and rEF patients, separately. The primary outcome was a composite of all-cause death and non-fatal acute coronary syndrome. Results The median follow-up period was 5.5 years in mrEF patients and 4.3 years in rEF patients. Cumulative event-free survival was significantly lower in the group with beta-blockers than in the group without beta-blockers in rEF (p = 0.003), whereas no difference was observed in mrEF (p = 0.137) between those with and without beta-blockers. In the multivariate analysis, use of beta-blockers was associated with reduction in clinical outcomes in patients with rEF (hazard ratio (HR), 0.59; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.36–0.97; p = 0.036), whereas no association was observed among those with mrEF (HR 0.74; 95% CI 0.49–1.10; p = 0.137). Conclusions Our observational study showed that use of beta-blockers was not associated with long-term clinical outcomes in IHD patients with mrEF, whereas a significant association was observed in those with rEF.

scholarly journals Contrast Volume/Raw eGFR Ratio for Predicting Contrast-Induced Acute Kidney Injury in Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for Myocardial Infarction

2015 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 61-68 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hoon Suk Park ◽  
Chan Joon Kim ◽  
Jeong-Eun Yi ◽  
Byung-Hee Hwang ◽  
Tae-Hoon Kim ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Myocardial Infarction ◽  
Acute Kidney Injury ◽  
Percutaneous Coronary Intervention ◽  
Roc Curve ◽  
Kidney Injury ◽  
Coronary Intervention ◽  
Left Ventricular ◽  
Left Ventricular Ejection ◽  
Contrast Volume ◽  
Percutaneous Coronary

Background: Considering that contrast medium is excreted through the whole kidney in a similar manner to drug excretion, the use of raw estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) rather than body surface area (BSA)-normalized eGFR is thought to be more appropriate for evaluating the risk of contrast-induced acute kidney injury (CI-AKI). Methods: This study included 2,189 myocardial infarction patients treated with percutaneous coronary intervention. Logistic regression analysis was performed to identify the independent risk factors. We used receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curves to compare the ratios of contrast volume (CV) to eGFR with and without BSA normalization in predicting CI-AKI. Results: The area under the curve (AUC) of the ROC curve for the model including all the significant variables such as diabetes mellitus, left ventricular ejection fraction, preprocedural glucose, and the CV/raw modification of diet in renal disease (MDRD) eGFR ratio was 0.768 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.720-0.816; p < 0.001]. When the CV/raw MDRD eGFR ratio was used as a single risk value, the AUC of the ROC curve was 0.650 (95% CI, 0.590-0.711; p < 0.001). When the CV/MDRD eGFR ratio with BSA normalization ratio was used, the AUC of the ROC curve further decreased to 0.635 (95% CI, 0.574-0.696; p < 0.001). The difference between the two AUCs was significant (p = 0.002). Conclusions: Raw eGFR is a better predictor for CI-AKI than BSA-normalized eGFR.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document