Sampath-Kumar Revathy, Mohammad Moman, von Koch Sacharias, Reeves Ryan, Al Khiami Belal, Ang Lawrence, Melendez Anna, Mahmud Ehtisham, Ben-Yehuda Ori, Erlinge David
Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, Sulpizio Cardiovascular Center, University of California San Diego, 9452 Medical Center Drive, La Jolla, CA 92037-7411, USA.
Department of Cardiology, Clinical Sciences, Lund University, Skane University Hospital, SE-221 85 Lund, Sweden.
Eur Heart J Open. 2025 Apr 18;5(3):oeaf045. doi: 10.1093/ehjopen/oeaf045. eCollection 2025 May.
Comparisons of international practice patterns and their impact on percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) outcomes are lacking. We compared temporal PCI trends between Sweden and a large university hospital system in the US.
Data within the Swedish Coronary Angiography and Angioplasty Registry (SCAAR) and the University of California San Diego Health internal National Cardiovascular Data Registry (NCDR) CathPCI Registry were used to identify patients who underwent PCI from 2007 to 2021. Baseline characteristics and practice patterns were assessed using all patients (275 021 Swedish cohort, 9883 US cohort). Mortality was analysed using a random-effects Cox model, restricted to patients treated at university hospitals and excluding those with cardiac arrest or cardiogenic shock (108 136 Swedish cohort, 9592 US cohort). The Swedish cohort was older, had a greater proportion of men, and was more likely to smoke (all < 0.001). The US cohort had a higher body mass index and was more likely to have diabetes, hyperlipidaemia, prior PCI, congestive heart failure, and peripheral arterial disease (all < 0.001). Sweden had lower rates of PCI for stable angina and lower use of mechanical circulatory support (all < 0.001). More STEMI patients were treated with only heparin as anticoagulation in Sweden, even in the contemporary era. There was earlier adoption and increased utilization of ticagrelor and radial access in Sweden, while there was earlier use of drug-eluting stents in the US. Fractional flow reserve was used more frequently in Sweden. There was no difference in adjusted all-cause mortality 1 year post-PCI for any indication between university hospitals in Sweden and the US (hazard ratio [HR] 1.09; 95% CI 0.86-1.37; = 0.48), and this finding was consistent across subgroups.
Despite significant differences in patient populations and practice variations, we found no difference in post-PCI mortality between university hospitals in Sweden and the US.
目前缺乏对国际实践模式及其对经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)结果影响的比较。我们比较了瑞典与美国一个大型大学医院系统之间PCI的时间趋势。
使用瑞典冠状动脉造影和血管成形术注册中心(SCAAR)以及加利福尼亚大学圣地亚哥分校健康系统内部的国家心血管数据注册中心(NCDR)CathPCI注册中心的数据,来确定2007年至2021年期间接受PCI的患者。使用所有患者(瑞典队列275021例,美国队列9883例)评估基线特征和实践模式。使用随机效应Cox模型分析死亡率,仅限于在大学医院接受治疗的患者,并排除心脏骤停或心源性休克患者(瑞典队列108136例,美国队列9592例)。瑞典队列患者年龄更大,男性比例更高,吸烟可能性更大(均P<0.001)。美国队列患者体重指数更高,患糖尿病、高脂血症、既往PCI、充血性心力衰竭和外周动脉疾病的可能性更大(均P<0.001)。瑞典稳定型心绞痛的PCI发生率较低,机械循环支持的使用率较低(均P<0.001)。在瑞典,即使在当代,更多ST段抬高型心肌梗死(STEMI)患者仅接受肝素抗凝治疗。瑞典更早采用并增加了替格瑞洛和桡动脉入路的使用,而美国更早使用药物洗脱支架。瑞典更频繁地使用血流储备分数。瑞典和美国大学医院之间,任何适应证PCI术后1年调整后的全因死亡率无差异(风险比[HR]为1.09;95%置信区间为0.86-1.37;P=0.48),这一发现亚组间一致。
尽管患者群体和实践差异显著,但我们发现瑞典和美国大学医院之间PCI术后死亡率无差异。