Why the study?
Spain had among the lowest rates of revascularisation and highest ratios of PCI to CABG, prompting an investigation into trends and changes in both procedures between 1998 and 2017.
How have the volume, patient risk profile, and in-hospital mortality of PCI and CABG changed in Spain from 1998 to 2017?
Cohort (n=603,976)
Yes
How have the volume, patient risk profile, and in-hospital mortality of PCI and CABG changed in Spain from 1998 to 2017?
p-value: p=<0.001
Over a 20-year period in Spain, the volume of myocardial revascularizations, particularly PCI, increased significantly while risk-adjusted in-hospital mortality for both PCI and CABG decreased.
INTRODUCTION: Spain is one of the countries with the lowest rates of revascularisation and highest ratio of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) to coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). OBJECTIVES: To investigate the changes and trends in the two revascularisation procedures between 1998 and 2017 in Spain. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. Analysis of in-hospital outcomes. SETTING: Minimum basic data set from the Spanish National Department of Health: mandatory database collecting information of patients who are attended in the Spanish public National Health System. PARTICIPANTS: 603 976 patients who underwent isolated CABG or PCI in the Spanish National Health System. The study period was divided in four 5-year intervals. Patients with acute myocardial infarction on admission were excluded. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOMES: We investigated the volume of procedures nationwide, the changes of the risk profile of patients and in-hospital mortality of both techniques. RESULTS: We observed a 2.2-fold increase in the rate of any type of myocardial revascularisation per million inhabitants-year: 357 (1998) to 776 (2017). 93 682 (15.5%) had a coronary surgery. PCI to CABG ratio rose from 2.2 (1998-2002) to 8.1 (2013-2017). Charlson's index increased by 0.8 for CABG and 1 for PCI. The median annual volume of PCI/hospital augmented from 136 to 232, while the volume of CABG was reduced from 137 to 74. In the two decades, we detected a significant reduction of CABG in-hospital mortality (6.5% vs 2.6%, p<0.001) and a small increase in PCI (1.2% vs 1.5%, p<0.001). Risk adjusted mortality rate was reduced for both CABG (1.51 vs 0.48, p<0.001), and PCI (1.42 vs 1.05, p<0.001). CONCLUSION: We detected a significant increase in the volume of revascularisations (particularly PCI) in Spain. Risk-adjusted in-hospital mortality was significantly reduced.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Carnero et al. (2021) conducted a cohort in isolated CABG or PCI (n=603,976). Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) vs. Coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) was evaluated on Volume of procedures nationwide, changes of the risk profile of patients and in-hospital mortality (p=<0.001).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: