Less than half of vein graft interventions use embolic protection
Ngày 09/05/2019 08:24 | Lượt xem: 1615

Current US guidelines recommend the use of embolic protection during saphenous vein graft percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) but, according to a new study, embolic protection is only used in 37.9% of cases with a significant decrease over time. Furthermore, use of embolic protection varies from site to site with a patient having 15.5-fold increased odds of undergoing saphenous graft PCI with embolic protection if they underwent the procedure at a site more likely to use embolic protection than a patient with similar characteristics undergoing the procedure at a site less likely to use embolic protection.

Writing in Circulation: Cardiovascular Interventions, Javier A Valle (Department of Medicine, Division of Cardiology, Rocky Mountain Regional VA Medical Center, Aurora, USA) and others comment that the recommendation to use embolic protection, when technically feasible, during saphenous vein graft PCI is “largely based on data for a distal balloon protection device that is no longer clinically available and an endpoint (cardiac biomarkers) that is no longer routinely assessed post-intervention”. They add that these factors and the technical challenges of embolic protection in this setting “have suggested that embolic protection is used in less than one third of saphenous venous graft PCI”. The aim of the present study was to determine the clinical characteristics and site variation associated with embolic protection use among patients undergoing contemporary vein graft intervention.

Of 7,266 single-vessel saphenous vein graft interventions performed between 2008 and 2017, 37.9% involved the use of an embolic protection device. Both vein graft interventions and the use of embolic protection devices decreased over time. Valle et al report: “The proportion of cases performed with embolic protection was less in the most recent year (29.6%) compared with the first year analysed (35.4%).”

The procedural characteristics associated with decreased embolic protection device use include distal anastomotic lesion location and preprocedural occlusion. However, the site where the intervention was performed was more relevant than patient demographics or clinical characteristics. The authors note: “The same patient could have a >15-fold higher odds of receiving this therapy simply by being treated at an alternative site. This variation has important implications, particularly as the data suggest that this guideline-recommended therapy may provide clinical benefit.”

In the study, use of embolic protection was associated with a 36% reduction in the odds of the composite outcome of periprocedural myocardial infarction or 30-day mortality. Furthermore, the individual outcome of death and unsuccessful intervention were also significantly lower among those treated with embolic protection. However, Valle et al note that the clinical outcomes associated with embolic protection “have been inconsistent across analyses”. They add a meta-analysis did indicate that embolic protection did not provide benefit but, after data from a large observational cohort was removed from the analysis, also suggested embolic protection provided a potential reduction in all-cause mortality and major adverse events.

Study author Stephen Waldo (Department of Medicine, Division of Cardiology, Rocky Mountain Regional VA Medical Center, Aurora, USA) told Cardiovascular News: “The data do suggest decreasing use of embolic protection devices with significant site-level variation, in the context of conflicting observational data evaluating their potential benefits for our patients. Ultimately, another randomised trial evaluating the use of these devices may be necessary to evaluate their potential in contemporary practice and provide additional data to support or refute the current American and European professional society guidelines. In the interim, I personally believe that it is reasonable to continue to use these devices when technical feasible.”

Source CardiovascularNews
Duc Tin Clinic 
Print Chia sẽ qua facebook bài: Less than half of vein graft interventions use embolic protection Chia sẽ qua google bài: Less than half of vein graft interventions use embolic protection Chia sẽ qua twitter bài: Less than half of vein graft interventions use embolic protection Chia sẽ qua MySpace bài: Less than half of vein graft interventions use embolic protection Chia sẽ qua LinkedIn bài: Less than half of vein graft interventions use embolic protection Chia sẽ qua stumbleupon bài: Less than half of vein graft interventions use embolic protection Chia sẽ qua icio bài: Less than half of vein graft interventions use embolic protection Chia sẽ qua digg bài: Less than half of vein graft interventions use embolic protection Chia sẽ qua yahoo bài: Less than half of vein graft interventions use embolic protection Chia sẽ qua yahoo bài: Less than half of vein graft interventions use embolic protection Chia sẽ qua yahoo bài: Less than half of vein graft interventions use embolic protection Chia sẽ qua yahoo bài: Less than half of vein graft interventions use embolic protection

Tin tức liên quan

CUSTOMER REVIEWS

  • I am Nguyen Thanh Sang, born in 1990. Since the examination and treatment at the clinic Duc Tin, I am very grateful to the Doctor for explaining and sharing about my illness. During the treatment time in the clinic I was very caring staff of the clinic. Now my illness has improved in a good way. Expect more and more clinic to be able to save many patients.

    I sincerely thank you !. Tel: 0938303275

  • Huynh Thi Muoi, born in 1940, was examined and treated at Duc Tin Clinic. I am very pleased about how to serve and care patients of the clinic. The doctor is committed to explaining and sharing with the patient.

    Huynh Thi Muoi sincerely thank you! Phone number: 0972868746

  • As I said Duc Tin surgical clinin is where my family trust, hope to visit. Physicians caring, thoughtful, gentle to the patient. Nurses and staff clinic polite, cheerful and thoughtful. This clinic clean, sterile, so I would love to. Tel: +84949914060.

  • The doctor is very caring, attentive and very gentle nurse, courteous, affable with me. The clinic is clean, comfortable, polite. I enjoyed this faith. Every visit I was very relieved disease. Tel: 0839820792.

  • I was patient, had to clinics of Dr. Le Duc Tin. I see very conscientious doctor patient care, answer any questions and very dedicated staff from the receptionist to the children tested, nursing. Clinics very clean and spacious. I'm very satisfied. Tel: +841227880829.

Search
Customer support

    Phone: (028) 3981 2678
    Mobile: 0903 839 878 - 0909 384 389

TOP