Frequency of Stroke After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention or Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting (from an Eleven-Year Statewide Analysis) - 18/04/17
![](/templates/common/images/mail.png)
for the
Myocardial Infarction Data Acquisition System (MIDAS 28) Study Group
Abstract |
We compared stroke rates associated with coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), both on-pump and off-pump, and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with both drug-eluting stent (DES) and bare-metal stent (BMS) and the impact on 30-day and 1-year all-cause mortality. The Myocardial Infarction Data Acquisition System database was used to study patients who had on-pump CABG (n = 47,254), off-pump CABG (n = 19,118), and PCI with BMS (n = 46,641), and DES (n = 115,942) in New Jersey from 2002 to 2012. Multiple logistic and Cox proportional hazard models were used to compare the risk of stroke and mortality. Adjustments were made for demographics, year of hospitalization, and co-morbidities. The rate of postprocedural stroke was lowest with DES (0.5%), followed by BMS (0.6%), off-pump CABG (1.3%), and on-pump CABG (1.8%). After adjustment, on-pump CABG had a higher risk of stroke compared with off-pump (odds ratio 1.36, 95% CI 1.18 to 1.56, p <0.0001). DES had lower risk of stroke compared with off-pump CABG (odds ratio 0.64, 95% CI 0.55 to 0.74, p <0.0001). There was a significant excess risk of 1-year mortality due to the interaction between stroke and procedure type (on-pump vs off-pump CABG and PCI with DES vs BMS; p value for interaction = 0.02). In conclusion, in this retrospective analysis of nonrandomized data from a statewide database, PCI with DES was associated with the lowest rate of postprocedural stroke, and off-pump CABG had a lower rate of postprocedural stroke than on-pump CABG; there was an excess 1-year mortality risk with on-pump versus off-pump CABG and with DES versus BMS in patients with stroke.
Le texte complet de cet article est disponible en PDF.Plan
The study was partially funded by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, Princeton, New Jersey. |
|
See page 201 for disclosure information. |
Vol 119 - N° 2
P. 197-202 - janvier 2017 Retour au numéroBienvenue sur EM-consulte, la référence des professionnels de santé.
L’accès au texte intégral de cet article nécessite un abonnement.
Déjà abonné à cette revue ?