Shiraishi Jun, Kohno Yoshio, Sawada Takahisa, Nishizawa Shinya, Arihara Masayasu, Hadase Mitsuyoshi, Hyogo Masayuki, Yagi Takakazu, Shima Takatomo, Okada Takashi, Matoba Satoaki, Yamada Hiroyuki, Tatsumi Tetsuya, Kitamura Makoto, Furukawa Keizo, Matsubara Hiroaki
Department of Cardiology, Kyoto First Red Cross Hospital, and Department of Cardiology and Vascular Regenerative Medicine, Kyoto Prefectural University School of Medicine, Japan.
Circ J. 2007 Aug;71(8):1208-12. doi: 10.1253/circj.71.1208.
Primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for acute myocardial infarction (AMI) is performed in hospitals without on-site coronary artery bypass graft surgery in the ;real world'. However, data on the in-hospital outcomes of primary PCI performed at hospitals with and without on-site cardiac surgery are still lacking in Japan.
In the present study, 2,230 AMI patients were enrolled in the AMI-Kyoto Multi-Center Risk Study between January 2000 and December 2005. Of these, 1,817 patients underwent primary PCI. Excluding patients without adequate data, we retrospectively compared clinical background, coronary risk factors, angiographic findings, acute results of primary PCI and in-hospital prognosis between patients undergoing primary PCI in hospitals without on-site cardiac surgery (without surgery group, n=792) and those in hospitals with (with surgery group, n=993). The without surgery group had higher prevalence of previous myocardial infarction, Killip class>or=3 at admission and multivessels as a culprit lesion than the with surgery group. The without surgery group was more likely to have lower frequency of stent usage and lower thrombolysis in myocardial infarction flow grade just after PCI, whereas it was more likely to have intra-aortic balloon pumping and temporary pacing during procedures. The overall in-hospital mortality did not differ between the 2 groups. On multivariate analysis, in AMI patients undergoing primary PCI, Killip class>or=3 at admission, multivessels or left main trunk (LMT) as culprit lesions, number of diseased vessels>or=2 or diseased LMT, and age were the independent predictors of the in-hospital mortality, but the presence of on-site cardiac surgery was not.
These results suggest that in-hospital outcomes in AMI patients undergoing primary PCI at hospitals without on-site cardiac surgery are comparable to those at hospitals with on-site cardiac surgery in Japan.
在“现实世界”中,急性心肌梗死(AMI)的直接经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)在没有现场冠状动脉旁路移植手术的医院进行。然而,在日本,关于有无现场心脏手术的医院进行直接PCI的院内结局数据仍然缺乏。
在本研究中,2000年1月至2005年12月期间,2230例AMI患者纳入了AMI-京都多中心风险研究。其中,1817例患者接受了直接PCI。排除数据不充分的患者后,我们回顾性比较了在没有现场心脏手术的医院(无手术组,n = 792)和有现场心脏手术的医院(有手术组,n = 993)接受直接PCI患者的临床背景、冠状动脉危险因素、血管造影结果、直接PCI的急性结果和院内预后。无手术组既往心肌梗死、入院时Killip分级≥3级以及多支血管作为罪犯病变的患病率高于有手术组。无手术组在PCI术后支架使用频率较低且心肌梗死溶栓血流分级较低的可能性更大,而在手术过程中更有可能使用主动脉内球囊反搏和临时起搏。两组的总体院内死亡率无差异。多变量分析显示,在接受直接PCI的AMI患者中,入院时Killip分级≥3级、多支血管或左主干(LMT)作为罪犯病变、病变血管数≥2支或病变LMT以及年龄是院内死亡的独立预测因素,但现场心脏手术的存在不是。
这些结果表明,在日本,在没有现场心脏手术的医院接受直接PCI的AMI患者的院内结局与有现场心脏手术的医院相当。