Dataset Information

A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Relationship Between Hospital Volume and the Outcomes of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention.

ABSTRACT: Previous reviews have suggested that hospital volume is inversely related to in-hospital mortality. However, percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) practices have changed substantially in recent years, and whether this relationship persists remains controversial.A systematic search was performed using PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library to identify studies that describe the effect of hospital volume on the outcomes of PCI. Critical appraisals of the methodological quality and the risk of bias were conducted independently by 2 authors. Fourteen of 96 potentiality relevant articles were included in the analysis. Twelve of the articles described the relationship between hospital volume and mortality and included data regarding odds ratios (ORs); 3 studies described the relationship between hospital volume and long-term survival, and only 1 study included data regarding hazard ratios (HRs). A meta-analysis of postoperative mortality was performed using a random effects model, and the pooled effect estimate was significantly in favor of high volume providers (OR: 0.79; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.72-0.86; P < 0.001). A systematic review of long-term survival was performed, and a trend toward better long-term survival in high volume hospitals was observed.This meta-analysis only included studies published after 2006 and revealed that postoperative mortality following PCI correlates significantly and inversely with hospital volume. However, the magnitude of the effect of volume on long-term survival is difficult to assess. Additional research is necessary to confirm our findings and to elucidate the mechanism underlying the volume-outcome relationship.

SUBMITTER: Lin X

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4748925 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundAlthough many studies show an inverse association between operator procedural volume and short-term adverse outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), the association between procedural volume and longer-term outcomes is unknown.MethodsUsing the National Cardiovascular Data Registry CathPCI registry data linked with Medicare claims data, we examined the association between operator PCI volume and long-term outcomes among patients ≥65 years of age. Operators were stratified by average annual PCI volume (counting PCIs performed in patients of all ages): low- (<50 PCIs), intermediate- (50-100), and high- (>100) volume operators. One-year unadjusted rates of death and major adverse coronary events (MACEs; defined as death, readmission for myocardial infarction, or unplanned coronary revascularization) were calculated with Kaplan-Meier methods. The proportional hazards assumption was not met, and risk-adjusted associations between operator volume and outcomes were calculated separately from the time of PCI to hospital discharge and from hospital discharge to 1-year follow-up.ResultsBetween July 1, 2009, and December 31, 2014, 723 644 PCI procedures were performed by 8936 operators: 2553 high-, 2878 intermediate-, and 3505 low-volume operators. Compared with high- and intermediate-volume operators, low-volume operators more often performed emergency PCI, and their patients had fewer cardiovascular comorbidities. Over 1-year follow-up, 15.9% of patients treated by low-volume operators had a MACE compared with 16.9% of patients treated by high-volume operators ( P=0.004). After multivariable adjustment, intermediate- and high-volume operators had a significantly lower rate of in-hospital death than low-volume operators (odds ratio, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.86-0.96 for intermediate versus low; odds ratio, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.75-0.83 for high versus low). There were no significant differences in rates of MACEs, death, myocardial infarction, or unplanned revascularization between operator cohorts from hospital discharge to 1-year follow-up (adjusted hazard ratio for MACEs, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.96-1.01 for intermediate versus low; hazard ratio, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.99-1.04 for high versus low).ConclusionsUnadjusted 1-year outcomes after PCI were worse for older adults treated by operators with higher annual volume; however, patients treated by these operators had more cardiovascular comorbidities. After risk adjustment, higher operator volume was associated with lower in-hospital mortality and no difference in postdischarge MACEs.

Project description:BackgroundThe relationship between procedural volume and outcomes for percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) is contentious, with previous reviews suggesting an inverse volume-outcome relationship. The aim of this study was to systematically review contemporary evidence to re-examine this relationship.MethodsA systematic review and meta-analysis was undertaken to examine the relationship between PCI procedural volume (both at hospital- and operator-levels) and outcomes in adults. The primary outcome was mortality. The secondary outcomes were complications, healthcare utilisation and process outcomes. Searches were conducted from 1 January 2008 to 28 May 2019. Certainty of the evidence was assessed using 'Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations' (GRADE). Screening, data extraction, quality appraisal and GRADE assessments were conducted independently by two reviewers.ResultsOf 1,154 unique records retrieved, 22 observational studies with 6,432,265 patients were included. No significant association was found between total PCI hospital volume and mortality (odds ratio [OR]: 0.84, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.69-1.03, I 2 = 86%). A temporal trend from significant to non-significant pooled effect estimates was observed. The pooled effect estimate for mortality was found to be significantly in favour of high-volume operators for total PCI procedures (OR: 0.77, 95% CI: 0.63-0.94, I 2 = 93%), and for high-volume hospitals for primary PCI procedures (OR: 0.77, 95% CI: 0.62-0.94, I 2 = 78%). Overall, GRADE certainty of evidence was 'very low'. There were mixed findings for secondary outcomes.ConclusionsA volume-outcome relationship may exist in certain situations, although this relationship appears to be attenuating with time, and there is 'very low' certainty of evidence. While volume might be important, it should not be the only standard used to define an acceptable PCI service and a broader evaluation of quality metrics should be considered that encompass patient experience and clinical outcomes. Systematic review registration: PROSPERO, CRD42019125288.

Dataset Information

A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Relationship Between Hospital Volume and the Outcomes of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets