Dataset Information

Presentation, management, and outcomes of 25 748 acute coronary syndrome admissions in Kerala, India: results from the Kerala ACS Registry.

ABSTRACT:

Aims

There are limited contemporary data on the presentation, management, and outcomes of acute coronary syndrome (ACS) admissions in India. We aimed to develop a prospective registry to address treatment and health systems gaps in the management of ACSs in Kerala, India.

Methods and results

We prospectively collected data on 25 748 consecutive ACS admissions from 2007 to 2009 in 125 hospitals in Kerala. We evaluated data on presentation, management, and in-hospital mortality and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE). We created random-effects multivariate regression models to evaluate predictors of outcomes while accounting for confounders. Mean (SD) age at presentation was 60 (12) years and did not differ among ACS types [ST-segment myocardial infarction (STEMI) = 37%; non-STEMI = 31%; unstable angina = 32%]. In-hospital anti-platelet use was high (>90%). Thrombolytics were used in 41% of STEMI, 19% of non-STEMI, and 11% of unstable angina admissions. Percutaneous coronary intervention rates were marginally higher in STEMI admissions. Discharge medication rates were variable and generally suboptimal (<80%). In-hospital mortality and MACE rates were highest for STEMI (8.2 and 10.3%, respectively). After adjustment, STEMI diagnosis (vs. unstable angina) [odds ratio (OR) (95% confidence interval = 4.06 (2.36, 7.00)], symptom-to-door time >6 h [OR = 2.29 (1.73, 3.02)], and inappropriate use of thrombolysis [OR = 1.33 (0.92, 1.91)] were associated with higher risk of in-hospital mortality and door-to-needle time <30 min [OR = 0.44 (0.27, 0.72)] was associated with lower mortality. Similar trends were seen for risk of MACE.

Conclusion

These data represent the largest ACS registry in India and demonstrate opportunities for improving ACS care.

SUBMITTER: Mohanan PP

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3538274 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background There are limited data to inform policy mandating primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI) volume benchmarks for catheterization laboratories in low- and middle-income countries. Methods and Results This prospective state-wide registry included ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction patients with symptoms of <12 hours, or with ongoing ischemia at 12 to 24 hours, reperfused with PPCI. From June 2013 to March 2016, we recruited 5560 consecutive patients. We categorized hospitals on the basis of annual PPCI volumes into low, medium, and high volume (<100, 100-199, and ≥200 PPCIs per year, respectively). Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox regression models were used to examine the association between PPCI volume and 1-year mortality. Among 42 recruiting hospitals, there were 24 (57.2%) low-volume, 8 (19%) medium-volume, and 10 (23.8%) high-volume hospitals. The median (25th-75th percentile) TIMI (Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction) ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction risk score was 3 (2-5). Cardiac arrest before admission occurred in 4.2%, 2.1%, and 2.9% of cases at low-, medium-, and high-volume hospitals, respectively (P=0.02). Total ischemic time differed significantly among low-volume (median [25th-75th percentile], 3.5 [2.4-5.5] hours), medium-volume (median, 3.8 [25th-75th percentile, 2.58-6.05] hours), and high-volume hospitals (median, 4.16 [25th-75th percentile 2.8-6.3] hours) (P=0.01). Vascular access was radial in 61.5%, 71.3%, and 63.2% of cases at low-, medium-, and high-volume hospitals, respectively (P=0.01). The observed 1-year mortality rate was 6.5%, 3.4%, and 8.6% at low-, medium- and high-volume hospitals, respectively (P<0.01), and the difference did not attenuate after multivariate adjustment (low versus medium: hazard ratio [95% CI], 1.80 [1.12-2.90]; high versus medium: hazard ratio [95% CI], 2.53 [1.78-3.58]) (P<0.01). Conclusions Low- and middle-income countries, like India, may have a nonlinear relationship between institutional PPCI volume and outcomes, partly driven by procedural variations and inequalities in access to care.