Dataset Information

Same Day Discharge versus Overnight Stay in the Hospital following Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Patients with Stable Coronary Artery Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

ABSTRACT:

Background

New research in interventional cardiology has shown the demand for percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) to have increased tremendously. Effective treatment with a lower hospital cost has been the aim of several PCI capable centers. This study aimed to compare the adverse clinical outcomes associated with same day discharge versus overnight stay in the hospital following PCI in a population of randomized patients with stable coronary artery disease (CAD).

Methods

The National Library of Medicine (MEDLINE/PubMed), the Cochrane Registry of Randomized Controlled Trials and EMBASE databases were searched (from March to June 2016) for randomized trials comparing same-day discharge versus overnight stay in the hospital following PCI. Main endpoints in this analysis included adverse cardiovascular outcomes observed during a 30-day period. Statistical analysis was carried out by the RevMan 5.3 software whereby odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated with respect to a fixed or a random effects model.

Results

Eight randomized trials with a total number of 3081 patients (1598 patients who were discharged on the same day and 1483 patients who stayed overnight in the hospital) were included. Results of this analysis showed that mortality, myocardial infarction (MI) and major adverse cardiac events (MACEs) were not significantly different between same day discharge versus overnight stay following PCI with OR: 0.22, 95% CI: 0.04-1.35; P = 0.10, OR: 0.68, 95% CI: 0.33-1.41; P = 0.30 and OR: 0.45, 95% CI: 0.20-1.02; P = 0.06 respectively. Blood transfusion and re-hospitalization were also not significantly different between these two groups with OR: 0.64, 95% CI: 0.13-3.21; P = 0.59 and OR: 1.53, 95% CI: 0.88-2.65; P = 0.13 respectively. Similarly, any adverse event, major bleeding and repeated revascularization were also not significantly different between these two groups of patients with stable CAD, with OR: 0.42, 95% CI: 0.05-3.97; P = 0.45, OR: 0.73, 95% CI: 0.15-3.54; P = 0.69 and OR: 0.67, 95% CI: 0.14-3.15; P = 0.61 respectively.

Conclusion

In terms of adverse cardiovascular outcomes, same day discharge was neither superior nor inferior to overnight hospital stay following PCI in those patients with stable CAD. However, future research will have to emphasize on the long-term consequences.

SUBMITTER: Bundhun PK

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5222585 | biostudies-literature | 2017

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Same Day Discharge versus Overnight Stay in the Hospital following Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Patients with Stable Coronary Artery Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Bundhun Pravesh Kumar PK Soogund Mohammad Zafooruddin Sani MZ Huang Wei-Qiang WQ

PloS one 20170109 1

<h4>Background</h4>New research in interventional cardiology has shown the demand for percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) to have increased tremendously. Effective treatment with a lower hospital cost has been the aim of several PCI capable centers. This study aimed to compare the adverse clinical outcomes associated with same day discharge versus overnight stay in the hospital following PCI in a population of randomized patients with stable coronary artery disease (CAD).<h4>Methods</h4>Th ...[more]

PMID: 28068415

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Same-day discharge (SDD) after elective percutaneous coronary intervention is safe, less costly, and preferred by patients, but it is usually performed in low-risk patients, if at all. To increase the appropriate use of SDD in more complex patients, we implemented a "patient-centered" protocol based on risk of complications at Barnes-Jewish Hospital. METHODS AND RESULTS:Our objectives were as follows: (1) to evaluate time trends in SDD; (2) to compare (a) mortality, bleeding, and acute kidney injury, (b) patient satisfaction, and (c) hospital costs by SDD versus no SDD (NSDD); and (3) to compare SDD eligibility by our patient-centered approach versus Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions guidelines. Our patient-centered approach was based on prospectively identifying personalized bleeding, mortality, and acute kidney injury risks, with a personalized safe contrast limit and mitigating those risks. We analyzed Barnes-Jewish Hospital's National Cardiovascular Data Registry CathPCI Registry data from July 1, 2009 to September 30, 2015 (N=1752). SDD increased rapidly from 0% to 77% (P<0.001), independent of radial access. Although SDD patients were comparable to NSDD patients, SDD was not associated with adverse outcomes (0% mortality, 0% bleeds, and 0.4% acute kidney injury). Patient satisfaction was high with SDD. Propensity score-adjusted costs were $7331 lower/SDD patient (P<0.001), saving an estimated $1.8 million annually. Only 16 patients (6.95%) met the eligibility for SDD by Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions guidelines, implying our patient-centered approach markedly increased SDD eligibility. CONCLUSIONS:With a patient-centered approach, SDD rapidly increased and was safe in 75% of patients undergoing elective percutaneous coronary intervention, despite patient complexity. Patient satisfaction was high, and hospital costs were lower. Patient-centered decision making to facilitate SDD is an important opportunity to improve the value of percutaneous coronary intervention.

Project description:ImportanceSame-day discharge (SDD) after elective percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is associated with lower costs and preferred by patients. However, to our knowledge, contemporary patterns of SDD after elective PCI with respect to the incidence, hospital variation, trends, costs, and safety outcomes in the United States are unknown.ObjectiveTo examine (1) the incidence and trends in SDD; (2) hospital variation in SDD; (3) the association between SDD and readmissions for bleeding, acute kidney injury (AKI), acute myocardial infarction (AMI), or mortality at 30, 90, and 365 days after PCI; and (4) hospital costs of SDD and its drivers.Design, setting, and participantsThis observational cross-sectional cohort study included 672 470 patients enrolled in the nationally representative Premier Healthcare Database who underwent elective PCI from 493 hospitals between January 2006 and December 2015 with 1-year follow-up.ExposuresSame-day discharge, defined by identical dates of admission, PCI procedure, and discharge.Main outcomes and measuresDeath, bleeding requiring a blood transfusion, AKI and AMI at 30, 90, or 365 days after PCI, and costs from hospitals' perspective, inflated to 2016.ResultsAmong 672 470 elective PCIs, 221 997 patients (33.0%) were women, 30 711 (4.6%) were Hispanic, 51 961 (7.7%) were African American, and 491 823 (73.1%) were white. The adjusted rate of SDD was 3.5% (95% CI, 3.0%-4.0%), which increased from 0.4% in 2006 to 6.3% in 2015. We observed substantial hospital variation for SDD from 0% to 83% (median incidence rate ratio, 3.82; 95% CI, 3.48-4.23), implying an average (median) 382% likelihood of SDD at one vs another hospital. Among SDD (vs non-SDD) patients, there was no higher risk of death, bleeding, AKI, or AMI at 30, 90, or 365 days. Same-day discharge was associated with a large cost savings of $5128 per procedure (95% CI, $5006-$5248), driven by reduced supply and room and boarding costs. A shift from existing SDD practices to match top-decile SDD hospitals could annually save $129 million in this sample and $577 million if adopted throughout the United States. However, residual confounding may be present, limiting the precision of the cost estimates.Conclusions and relevanceOver 2006 to 2015, SDD after elective PCI was infrequent, with substantial hospital variation. Given the safety and large savings of more than $5000 per PCI associated with SDD, greater and more consistent use of SDD could markedly increase the overall value of PCI care.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Nowadays 57% of the cardiologists based in the United Kingdom and 32% of the cardiologists based in Canada utilize same day discharge (SDD) following elective percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) as a routine practice. In this analysis, we aimed to systematically assess early versus late clinical outcomes following SDD after elective PCI. METHODS:The Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online, the Cochrane Central, the Resources from the United States National Library of Medicine (www.ClinicalTrials.gov: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov) and EMBASE were carefully searched for relevant English publications which reported early versus late clinical outcomes in patients who were discharged on the same day following revascularization by PCI. Relevant clinical outcomes which were reported in the original studies were considered as the endpoints in this analysis. Odd ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were used to represent the data, and RevMan 5.3 was used as the statistical software. RESULTS:A total number of 21, 687 participants (enrollment time period from the year 1998 to the year 2015) were assigned to this analysis. When early versus late clinical outcomes were compared in patients who were discharged on the same day following elective PCI, major adverse cardiac events (OR: 0.75, 95% CI: 0.31-1.79; P?=?.51), mortality (OR: 0.26, 95% CI: 0.06-1.06; P?=?.06), stroke (OR: 1.46, 95% CI: 0.72-2.94; P?=?.29), arrhythmia (OR: 1.30, 95% CI: 0.64-2.63; P?=?.47), hematoma (OR: 1.00, 95% CI: 0.60-1.66; P?=?1.00) and major bleeding from access site (OR: 1.68, 95% CI: 0.22-12.85; P?=?.62) were not significantly different. Post-procedural myocardial infarction (OR: 2.01, 95% CI: 0.71-5.70; P?=?.19) and minor bleeding from access site (OR: 6.61, 95% CI: 0.86-50.66; P?=?.07) were also similarly manifested. However, re-hospitalization was significantly higher in those patients with late clinical outcomes (OR: 0.18, 95% CI: 0.07-0.44; P?=?.0002). CONCLUSIONS:In those patients who were discharged from the hospital on the same day following elective PCI, no significant difference was observed in the assessed early versus late clinical outcomes. However, late clinical outcomes resulted in a significantly higher rate of re-hospitalization. Larger studies should confirm this hypothesis.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Restrictive transfusion strategies supported by large randomized trials are resulting in decreased blood utilization in cardiac surgery. What remains to be determined, however, is the impact of lower discharge hemoglobin (Hb) levels on readmission rates. We assessed patients with higher versus lower Hb levels on discharge to compare 30-day readmission rates after coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). METHODS:We retrospectively evaluated 1552 patients undergoing isolated CABG at our institution from January 2013 to May 2016. We evaluated 2 Hb cohorts: "high" (above) and "low" (below) the mean discharge Hb level of 9.4 g/dL, comparing patient characteristics, blood utilization, and clinical outcomes including 30-day readmission rates. We further evaluated the effects of the lowest (<8 g/dL) discharge Hb levels on 30-day readmission rates by dividing the patients into 4 anemia cohorts based on discharge Hb levels: "no anemia" (>12 g/dL), "mild anemia" (10-11.9 g/dL), "moderate anemia" (8-9.9 g/dL), and "severe anemia" (<8 g/dL). Risk adjustment accounted for age, sex, Charlson comorbidity index, preoperative comorbidities, revision sternotomy, and patient blood management program implementation. RESULTS:The "high" and "low" groups had similar patient characteristics except for Hb levels (mean discharge Hb was 10.4 ± 0.9 vs 8.5 ± 0.6 g/dL, respectively). Notably, no evidence for a difference in 30-day readmission rates was noted between the "high" (76/746; 10.2%) and "low" (97/806; 12.0%) (P = .25) Hb cohorts. The 4 anemia cohorts had differences in age, revision sternotomy incidence, Hb levels, certain patient comorbidities, and time to readmission. On multivariable analysis, the risk-adjusted odds of readmission in the "low" Hb cohort (odds ratio, 1.16; 95% confidence interval, 0.84-1.61; P = .36) was not significant compared to the "high" Hb cohort. Compared to patients with discharge Hb ?8 g/dL, patients with Hb <8 g/dL had a higher incidence of readmission (22/129; 17.1% vs 151/1423; 10.6%; P = .036). On multivariable analysis, Hb <8 g/dL on discharge was predictive of readmission (odds ratio, 1.77; 95% confidence interval, 1.05-2.88; P = .03). The most common reason for readmission was volume overload, followed by infection and arrhythmias. CONCLUSIONS:A discharge Hb level below the institution mean for CABG patients does not provide evidence for an association with an increased 30-day readmission rate. In the small number of patients discharged with Hb <8 g/dL, there is a suggestion of increased risk for readmission and larger more controlled studies are needed to verify or refute this finding.

Project description:BackgroundIn patients presenting with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction, percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) reduces mortality when compared with fibrinolysis. In other forms of coronary artery disease (CAD), however, it has been controversial whether PCI reduces mortality. In this meta-analysis, we examine the benefits of PCI in (1) patients post-myocardial infarction (MI) who did not receive immediate revascularization; (2) patients who have undergone primary PCI for ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction but have residual coronary lesions; (3) patients who have suffered a non-ST-segment-elevation acute coronary syndrome; and (4) patients with truly stable CAD with no recent infarct. This analysis includes data from the recently presented International Study of Comparative Health Effectiveness with Medical and Invasive Approaches (ISCHEMIA) and Complete versus Culprit-Only Revascularization Strategies to Treat Multivessel Disease after Early PCI for STEMI (COMPLETE) trials.Methods and resultsWe systematically identified all randomized trials of PCI on a background of medical therapy for the treatment of CAD. The ISCHEMIA trial, presented in November 2019, was eligible for inclusion. Data were combined using a random-effects meta-analysis. The primary end point was all-cause mortality. Forty-six trials, including 37 757 patients, were eligible. In the 3 unstable scenarios, PCI had the following effects on mortality: unrevascularized post-MI relative risk (RR) 0.68 (95% CI, 0.45-1.03); P=0.07; multivessel disease following ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (RR, 0.84 [95% CI, 0.69-1.04]; P=0.11); non-ST-segment-elevation acute coronary syndrome (RR, 0.84 [95% CI, 0.72-0.97]; P=0.02). Overall, in these unstable scenarios PCI was associated with a significant reduction in mortality (RR, 0.84 [95% CI, 0.75-0.93]; P=0.02). In unstable CAD, PCI also reduced cardiac death (RR, 0.69 [95% CI, 0.53-0.90]; P=0.007) and MI (RR, 0.74 [95% CI, 0.62-0.90]; P=0.002). For stable CAD, PCI did not reduce mortality (RR, 0.98 [95% CI, 0.87-1.11]), cardiac death (RR, 0.89 [95% CI, 0.71-1.12]; P=0.33), or MI (RR, 0.96 [95% CI, 0.86-1.08]; P=0.54).ConclusionsPCI prevents death, cardiac death, and MI in patients with unstable CAD. For patients with stable CAD, PCI shows no evidence of an effect on any of these outcomes.

Project description:ObjectivesTo assess the perceptions of patients with stable coronary artery disease of the urgency and benefits of elective percutaneous coronary intervention and to examine how they vary across centers and by providers.DesignCross sectional study.Setting10 US academic and community hospitals performing percutaneous coronary interventions between 2009 and 2011.Participants991 patients with stable coronary artery disease undergoing elective percutaneous coronary intervention.Main outcome measuresPatients' perceptions of the urgency and benefits of percutaneous coronary intervention, assessed by interview. Multilevel hierarchical logistic regression models examined the variation in patients' understanding across centers and operators after adjusting for patient characteristics, using median odds ratios.ResultsThe most common reported benefits from percutaneous coronary intervention were to extend life (90%, n=892; site range 80-97%) and to prevent future heart attacks (88%, n=872; site range 79-97%). Although nearly two thirds of patients (n=661) reported improvement of symptoms as a benefit of percutaneous coronary intervention (site range 52-87%), only 1% (n=9) identified this as the only benefit. Substantial variability was noted in the ways informed consent was obtained at each site. After adjusting for patient and operator characteristics, the median odds ratios showed significant variation in patients' perceptions of percutaneous coronary intervention across sites (range 1.4-3.1) but not across operators within a site.ConclusionPatients have a poor understanding of the benefits of elective percutaneous coronary intervention, with significant variation across sites. No sites had a high proportion of patients accurately understanding the benefits. Coupled with the wide variability in the ways in which hospitals obtain informed consent, these findings suggest that hospital level interventions into the structure and processes of obtaining informed consent for percutaneous coronary intervention might improve patient comprehension and understanding.

Dataset Information

Same Day Discharge versus Overnight Stay in the Hospital following Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Patients with Stable Coronary Artery Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Same Day Discharge versus Overnight Stay in the Hospital following Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Patients with Stable Coronary Artery Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets