External validation of established risk adjustment models for procedural complications after percutaneous coronary intervention

BACKGROUND

Workable risk models for patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) are needed urgently.

OBJECTIVE

To validate two proposed risk adjustment models (Mayo Clinic Risk Score (MC), USA and North West Quality Improvement Programme (NWQIP), UK models) for in-hospital PCI complications on an independent dataset of relatively high risk patients undergoing PCI.

SETTING

Tertiary centre in northern England.

METHODS

Between September 2002 and August 2006, 5034 consecutive PCI procedures (validation set) were performed on a patient group characterised by a high incidence of acute myocardial infarction (MI; 16.1%) and cardiogenic shock (1.7%). Two external models-the NWQIP model and the MC model-were externally validated.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

Major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events: in-hospital mortality, Q-wave MI, emergency coronary artery bypass grafting and cerebrovascular accidents.

RESULTS

An overall in-hospital complication rate of 2% was observed. Multivariate regression analysis identified risk factors for in-hospital complications that were similar to the risk factors identified by the two external models. When fitted to the dataset, both external models had an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve >or=0.85 (c index (95% CI), NWQIP 0.86 (0.82 to 0.9); MC 0.87(0.84 to 0.9)), indicating overall excellent model discrimination and calibration (Hosmer-Lemeshow test, p>0.05). The NWQIP model was accurate in predicting in-hospital complications in different patient subgroups.

CONCLUSIONS

Both models were externally validated. Both predictive models yield comparable results that provide excellent model discrimination and calibration when applied to patient groups in a different geographic population other than that in which the original model was developed.

One year results of the Middlesbrough early revascularisation to limit infarction (MERLIN) trial

OBJECTIVE

To report one year results of the MERLIN (Middlesbrough early revascularisation to limit infarction) trial, a prospective randomised trial comparing the strategy of coronary angiography and urgent revascularisation with conservative treatment in patients with failed fibrinolysis complicating ST segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). The 30 day results have recently been published. At the planning stage of the trial, it was determined that follow up of trial patients would continue annually to three years to determine whether late benefit occurred.

SUBJECTS

307 patients who received a fibrinolytic for STEMI but failed to reperfuse early according to previously described ECG criteria and did not develop cardiogenic shock.

METHODS

Patients were randomly assigned to receive either emergency coronary angiography with a view to proceeding to urgent revascularisation (rescue percutaneous coronary intervention (rPCI) arm) or continued medical treatment (conservative arm). The primary end point was all cause mortality at 30 days. The secondary end points included the composite end point of death, reinfarction, stroke, unplanned revascularisation, or heart failure at 30 days. The same end points were evaluated at one year and these results are presented.

RESULTS

All cause mortality at one year was similar in the conservative arm and the rPCI arm (13.0% v 14.4%, p = 0.7, risk difference (RD) -1.4%, 95% confidence interval (CI) -9.3 to 6.4). The incidence of the composite secondary end point of death, reinfarction, stroke, unplanned revascularisation, or heart failure was significantly higher in the conservative arm (57.8% v 43.1%, p = 0.01, RD 14.7%, 95% CI 3.5% to 25.5%). This was driven almost exclusively by a significantly higher incidence of subsequent unplanned revascularisation in the conservative arm (29.9% v 12.4%, p < 0.001, RD 17.5%, 95% CI 8.5% to 26.4%). Reinfarction and clinical heart failure were numerically, but not statistically, more common in the conservative arm (14.3% v 10.5%, p = 0.3, RD 3.8%, 95% CI -3.7 to 11.4, and 31.2% v 26.1%, p = 0.3, RD 5.0%, 95% CI -5.1 to 15.1). There was a strong trend towards fewer strokes in the conservative arm (1.3% v 5.2%, p = 0.06, RD -3.9%, 95% CI -8.9 to 0.06).

CONCLUSION

At one year of follow up, there was no survival advantage in the rPCI arm compared with the conservative arm. The incidence of the composite secondary end point was significantly lower in the rPCI arm, but this was driven almost entirely by a highly significant reduction in the incidence of further revascularisation.

Predictors of outcome after percutaneous treatment for cardiogenic shock

OBJECTIVES

To determine predictors of outcome after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of a cohort of 113 patients undergoing emergency coronary angiography and attempted PCI for cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction in a regional cardiothoracic unit.

RESULTS

In-hospital mortality was 51% (58 patients). Adverse outcome was associated with previous myocardial infarction, age over 70 years, cardiogenic shock complicating failure to respond to thrombolytic treatment (failed thrombolysis), and multivessel coronary artery disease. Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that the first three factors were independent predictors of in-hospital death with odds ratios of 5.21 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.85 to 14.69), 4.02 (95% CI 1.14 to 14.12), and 3.78 (95% CI 1.43 to 9.96), respectively.

CONCLUSION

About 50% of patients with cardiogenic shock undergoing a strategy of urgent coronary angiography and PCI survive to hospital discharge. Survivors do well in the subsequent six months. Emergency PCI for cardiogenic shock reduces mortality from an expected 80% to about 50%. Clinical features can help determine which patients are most likely to gain from urgent coronary angiography and attempted PCI. Alternative strategies are needed to improve the outcome of patients who fare badly.

Early and late reactions following the use of iopamidol 340, iomeprol 350 and iodixanol 320 in cardiac catheterization

GOAL

To investigate the incidence of early (< 24 hours) and late (> 24 hours to 7 days) reactions to 3 contrast agents commonly used in cardiac catheterization.

METHODS AND RESULTS

A total of 2,108 patients undergoing cardiac catheterization in a Regional Cardiothoracic Unit were randomly assigned to receive 1 of 3 commonly used contrast agents in a prospective, double-blind study. The contrast agents were iopamidol 340 (Niopam ), a nonionic monomer; iomeprol 350 (Iomeron ), a nonionic dimer; and iodixanol 320 (Visipaque ), a nonionic dimer. The main outcome measures were the incidence of early (< 24 hours) reactions following catheterization and the incidence of late (24 hours to 7 days) reactions. Early reactions, excluding patients with heat on left ventriculography as the sole symptom, were relatively common (7.4%), but there was no significant difference between the 3 agents (p = 0.35). Late skin reactions, excluding reactions solely at the site of the arterial puncture and continuations of early urticarial reactions, were also relatively common (5.4%), but the incidence differed between the 3 agents. Such reactions occurred in 2.7% of those receiving iopamidol 340 (Niopam ), 3.5% of those receiving iomeprol 350 (Iomeron ) and 10.4% of those receiving iodixanol 320 (Visipaque ) (p < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

The incidence of early adverse reactions is similar with these 3 contrast agents. However, late skin reactions are significantly more common with iodixanol 320 (Visipaque ) than with the other 2 agents. Although such reactions were rarely troublesome, patients should be advised accordingly.