British Cardiovascular Intervention Society registry framework: a quality improvement initiative on behalf of the National Institute of Cardiovascular Outcomes Research (NICOR)

The British Cardiovascular Intervention Society (BCIS) percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) registry is hosted by the National Institute of Cardiovascular Outcomes Research (NICOR) at Bart's Heart Centre and collects clinical characteristics, indications, procedural details, and outcomes of all patients undergoing PCI in the UK. The data are used for audit and research to monitor and improve PCI practices and patient outcomes. Bespoke live data analysis and structured monthly reports are used to provide real-time feedback to all participating hospitals about the provision of care. Risk-adjusted analyses are used as a quality metric and benchmarking PCI practices. The consecutive patients undergoing PCI in all PCI performing hospitals in the UK from 1994 to present. One hundred and thirteen variables encompassing patient demographics, indication, procedural details, complications, and in-hospital outcomes are recorded. Prospective data are collected electronically and encrypted before transfer to central database servers. Data are validated locally and further range checks, sense checks, and assessments of internal consistency are applied during data uploads. Analyses of uploaded data including an assessment of data completeness are provided to all hospitals for validation, with repeat validation rounds prior to public reporting. Endpoints are in-hospital PCI complications, bleeding and mortality. All-cause mortality is obtained via linkage to the Office of National Statistics. No other linkages are available at present. Available for research by application to NICOR at http://www.nicor.org.uk/ using a data sharing agreement.

The Pt-Cr everolimus-eluting stent with bioabsorbable polymer in the treatment of patients with acute coronary syndromes. Results from the SYNERGY ACS registry

OBJECTIVES

We investigated the safety and efficacy of the bioabsorbable polymer-coated, everolimus-eluting coronary stent (SYNERGY) stent in a real-world study population with acute coronary syndromes (ACS).

BACKGROUND

A number of clinical trials support the overall efficacy and safety of the SYNERGY stent. However, a recent trial (TIDES-ACS) in the context of ACS reported worrying figures of infarction and definite/probable stent thrombosis in the SYNERGY control arm.

METHODS

This is a multicenter registry (10 centers) including consecutive patients with ACS (unstable angina, non-ST elevated myocardial infarction, ST elevated myocardial infarction) who underwent percutaneous revascularization with the implantation of SYNERGY stent. The primary endpoint was the composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction and target lesion revascularization at 12 months.

RESULTS

A total of 1008 patients were included with age 65.4 ± 14.8 years, 23.8% females and a 24.5% diabetics. Regarding presentation, a 15.2% with unstable angina, 43% with non-ST elevated myocardial infarction and 41.8% with ST elevated myocardial infarction. Primary outcome was met in 3% (7% in SYNERGY TIDES-ACS arm, P superiority <0.01 and 6.3% in OPTIMAX TIDES-ACS arm, P superiority <0.01). Cardiac death was 1.3% (1.6%, p = 0.8 and 0.5%, P superiority =0.1 respectively). Myocardial infarction was 1.6% (4.6%, p < 0.01 and 1.8%, P superiority = 0.9 respectively). Target lesion revascularization was 1% (3.4%, p < 0.01 and 5.4%, P superiority <0.01 respectively). Definite or probable thrombosis was 0.9% (2.8%, p ≤ 0.01 and 1.1%, P superiority = 0.8 respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this registry show a very good safety and efficacy profile at 12 months for the SYNERGY stent in patients with ACS.

SUMMARY

A recent trial (TIDES-ACS) in the context of acute coronary syndromes (ACS) reported worrying figures of infarction and definite/probable stent thrombosis in the SYNERGY stent control arm. We investigated the safety of SYNERGY stent in a real-world study population with ACS applying the same inclusion/exclusion criteria as used in the TIDES-ACS trial. Primary endpoint was the composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction and TLR at 12 months. A total of 1008 patients have been included. Primary outcome was met in 3% (7% in SYNERGY TIDES-ACS arm, P superiority <0.01 and 6.3% in OPTIMAX TIDES-ACS arm, P superiority <0.01).

Impact of type 2 diabetes mellitus in the utilization and in-hospital outcomes of surgical aortic valve replacement in Spain (2001-2015)

BACKGROUND

The aims of this study were to examine trends in the incidence and in-hospital outcomes of SAVR among T2DM patients from 2001 to 2015, to compare clinical variables among T2DM patients and matched non-T2DM patients hospitalized for SAVR and to identify factors associated with in-hospital mortality (IHM) among T2DM patients.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective study using the Spanish National Hospital Discharge Database, 2001-2015. We included patients who had SAVR as the procedure in their discharge report. For each T2DM patient, we selected a sex-, age-, implanted valve type- and year-matched nondiabetic patient.

RESULTS

We identified 78,223 patients who underwent SAVR (23.49% with T2DM). The prevalence of T2DM increased significantly (p < 0.001) from 16.7% in 2001-2003 to 23.5% in 2012-2015. The incidence of SAVR increased significantly from 28.99 cases in 2001 to 65.79 cases in 2015 per 100,000 individuals in the T2DM population. Using Poisson regression models, we found that the incidence of SAVR was 2.60 times higher among patients with T2DM than among those without diabetes (IRR 2.60; 95% CI 2.56-2.65). The incidence of mechanical SAVR among T2DM patients remained stable from 2001 to 2015, and bioprosthetic SAVR rose from 8.29 to 41.74 cases per 100,000 individuals in the T2DM patient population (p < 0.001). We matched 8835 and 9543 patients who underwent mechanical and bioprosthetic SAVR, respectively. IHM decreased over time in T2DM patients and non-T2DM patients (from 8.89% and 7.81% to 3.88% and 5.07%, respectively). IHM was significantly lower in T2DM patients than in nondiabetic subjects who underwent bioprosthetic SAVR (4.77% vs. 6.04%, p < 0.001), with similar results obtained for mechanical valves (7.11% and 7.77%).

CONCLUSIONS

The incidence of SAVR was higher in T2DM patients, and the incidence of bioprosthetic SAVR increased significantly among T2DM subjects. IHM decreased over time, regardless of the existence or absence of T2DM and the valve type. IHM was significantly lower in T2DM patients than in nondiabetic patients who underwent bioprosthetic SAVR.

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation and surgical aortic valve replacement among hospitalized patients with and without type 2 diabetes mellitus in Spain (2014-2015)

Background

Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is strongly related to the in-hospital and short-term prognosis in patients with cardiovascular diseases needing surgical or invasive interventions. How T2DM might influence the treatment of aortic stenosis (AS) has not been completely elucidated for surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) or transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). The aims of this study were: (1) to describe the use of aortic valve replacement procedures (TAVI and SAVR) among hospitalized patients with and without T2DM; and (2) to identify factors associated with in hospital mortality (IHM) among patients undergoing these procedures.

Methods

We analyzed data from the Spanish National Hospital Discharge Database between January 1, 2014 and December 31, 2015 for patients aged ≥ 40 years. We selected patients whose medical procedures included TAVI (ICD-9-CM codes 35.05, 35.06) and SAVR (ICD-9-CM codes 35.21, 35.22). We stratified each cohort by diabetes status: T2DM (ICD-9-CM codes 250.x0, 250.x2) and no diabetes. We retrieved data about specific comorbidities, risk factors, procedures, and specific in-hospital postoperative complications. Hospital outcome variables included IHM, and length of hospital stay (LOHS).

Results

We identified a total of 2141 and 16,013 patients who underwent TAVI (n = 715; 33.39% with T2DM) and SAVR (n = 4057; 25.33% with T2DM). In patients who underwent TAVI we found no differences in IHM (3.64% in T2DM vs. 5.12% in non-T2DM, p = 0.603). In the cohort of SAVR, mean LOHS was significantly lower in patients with T2DM than in non-diabetic patients (13.77 vs. 17.27 days). IHM was lower in patients with T2DM (4.36% vs. 6.31%, p < 0.01). After multivariable adjustment for both procedures, patients with T2DM had significantly lower IHM than patients without diabetes (adjusted OR 0.60; IC 95% 0.37–0.99 for TAVI and adjusted OR 0.80; IC 95% 0.66-0-96 for SAVR).

Conclusions

T2DM diabetic patients with AS undergoing a valvular replacement procedure through SAVR or TAVI did not have a worse prognosis compared to non-diabetic patients during hospitalization, showing lower IHM after multivariable adjustment. However, given the limitations of administrative data more prospective studies and clinical trials aimed at evaluating the influence of these procedures in diabetic patients with AS are needed.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12933-017-0631-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.