| 1. |
- Gudmundsson, T., et al.
(författare)
-
Does the quality index of adherence to the evidence-based guidelines predict mortality in patients with myocardial infarction?
- 2022
-
Ingår i: European Heart Journal. - : Oxford University Press. - 0195-668X .- 1522-9645. ; 43:Suppl. 2, s. 2282-2282
-
Tidskriftsartikel (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- Background: The SWEDEHEART quality index of hospitals’ adherence to the evidence-based (EB) guidelines for myocardial infarction (MI) patients has been continuously used for several decades in Sweden. The grading protocol is based on the consensus among hospitals. The hospitals are awarded points (0, 0.5, 1) for each of the 11 indicators depending on the proportion of patients who received EB treatment and achieved treatment goals. The 11 indicators at present are reperfusion treatment in STEMI (yes/no), time to-reperfusion treatment in STEMI, time to revascularisation in NSTEMI, P2Y12 antagonists at discharge, ACE-inhibitor/ARB at discharge, the proportion of patients at follow-up, smoking cessation at one-year, participation in a physical exercise program, target LDL-cholesteroland target blood pressure at one year.Purpose: To evaluate whether the SWEDEHEART quality index predicts mortality in patients with MI.Methods: We used data for all MI patients reported to the SWEDEHEAR Tregistry from 72 hospitals in Sweden between 2015–2021. We calculated the difference in quality index between 2021 and 2015. The hospitals were divided into quintiles based on the difference in the score. Logistic regression with log-time offset was used to adjust for confounders (age, gender, diabetes, hypertension, hyperlipidemia, STEMI/NSTEMI, cardiac arrest before admission, occupation status, history of heart failure, prior MI, prior PCI, prior CABG, cardiogenic shock).Results: We identified 98,635 patients with MI, 32,608 (33.1%) were women and 34,198 (34.7%) had STEMI. The average age was 70.8±12.2 years. The median follow-up time was 2.7 years (IQR 1.06–4.63). The crude all-cause mortality rate was 5.5% at 30-days and 22.3% after long-term follow-up. Most hospitals (72.1%) improved their quality index on average by 3.4% per year (P<0.001). The increase in the quality index continued during COVID-19 pandemic (2020–2021) with average increase of 8.6%, 95% CI, 0.97–1.02; P<0.001. The median change in SWEDE-HEART quality index score among the quintiles were −1.5 (Q1), 0,5 (Q2), 2,5 (Q3), 3 (Q4), and 4 (Q5). We found no difference in mortality between the quintiles at 30-days (OR 0.99; 95% CI 0.97–1.02; p=1.02) and long-term (OR 1.01; 95% CI 0,99–1.02; p=0.850).Conclusion: The SWEDEHEART quality index provides valuable descriptive information about hospitals’ adherence to the guidelines. However, the index, in its current form, does not predict mortality in patients with MI.
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
- Volz, S., et al.
(författare)
-
Long-term survival in patients with coronary artery disease undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention with or without intracoronary pressure wire guidance : a report from SCAAR
- 2020
-
Ingår i: European Heart Journal. - : Oxford University Press. - 0195-668X .- 1522-9645. ; 41:Suppl. 2, s. 2507-2507
-
Tidskriftsartikel (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- Background: Intracoronary pressure wire measurements of fractional flow reserve (FFR) and instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) provide decision-making guidance during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). However, limited data exist on the impact of FFR/iFR on long-term clinical outcomes in patients with stable angina, unstable angina (UA)/non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI), or STEMI.Methods: We used data from the Swedish Coronary Angiography and Angioplasty Registry (SCAAR) on all patients in Sweden undergoing PCI (with or without FFR/iFR guidance) for stable angina, UA/NSTEMI, or STEMI between January 2005 and March 2018. The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality and the secondary endpoints were stent thrombosis or restenosis and periprocedural complications. The primary model was multilevel Cox proportional-hazards regression using an instrumental variable (IV) to adjust for known and unknown confounders with treating hospital as a treatment-preference instrument. The following variables were entered into Cox proportional-hazards regression in addition to the IV: age, sex, diabetes, indication for PCI, severity of coronary disease, smoking status, hypertension, hyperlipidemia, previous myocardial infarction, previous PCI, previous coronary artery bypass graft, type of stent.Results: In total, 151,001 patients underwent PCI: 31,514 (20.9%) for stable angina, 74,982 (49.6%) for UA/NSTEMI, and 44,505 (29.5%) for STEMI. Of these, FFR/iFR guidance was used in 11,433 patients (7.6%): 5029 (44.0%) with stable angina, 5989 (52.4%) with UA/NSTEMI, and 415 (3.6%) with STEMI; iFR was used in 1156 (10.1%) of these patients. After a median follow-up of 1784 (range 1–4824) days, the FFR/iFR group had lower adjusted risk estimates for all-cause mortality [hazard ratio (HR) 0.79; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.69–0.91; P=0.001] and stent thrombosis and restenosis (HR 0.13; 95% CI 0.09–0.19; P<0.001). The number of periprocedural complications did not differ significantly between the groups (odds ratio 0.69; 95% CI 0.30–1.55; P=0.368). There was no interaction between FFR/iFR and indication for PCI. We found no difference between FFR and iFR (HR 1.12; 95% CI 0.90–1.59; P=0.216).Conclusions: In this observational study, the use of FFR/IFR was associated with a lower risk of long-term mortality in patients undergoing PCI for stable angina, UA/NSTEMI, or STEMI. Our study supports the current European and American guidelines for the use of FFR/iFR during PCI and shows that intracoronary pressure wire guidance has prognostic benefit in patients with stable angina as well as in patients with the acute coronary syndrome.
|
|
| 5. |
|
|
| 6. |
|
|
| 7. |
|
|
| 8. |
|
|
| 9. |
|
|
| 10. |
|
|
