Contemporary Risk Models for In-Hospital and 30-Day Mortality After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

IF 3.1 3区 医学 Q2 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS
Christine Chow, Jacob Doll
{"title":"Contemporary Risk Models for In-Hospital and 30-Day Mortality After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention","authors":"Christine Chow, Jacob Doll","doi":"10.1007/s11886-024-02047-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Purpose of Review</h3><p>Risk models for mortality after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) are underutilized in clinical practice though they may be useful during informed consent, risk mitigation planning, and risk adjustment of hospital and operator outcomes. This review analyzed contemporary risk models for in-hospital and 30-day mortality after PCI.</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Recent Findings</h3><p>We reviewed eight contemporary risk models. Age, sex, hemodynamic status, acute coronary syndrome type, heart failure, and kidney disease were consistently found to be independent risk factors for mortality. These models provided good discrimination (<i>C</i>-statistic 0.85–0.95) for both pre-catheterization and comprehensive risk models that included anatomic variables.</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Summary</h3><p>There are several excellent models for PCI mortality risk prediction. Choice of the model will depend on the use case and population, though the CathPCI model should be the default for in-hospital mortality risk prediction in the United States. Future interventions should focus on the integration of risk prediction into clinical care.</p>","PeriodicalId":10829,"journal":{"name":"Current Cardiology Reports","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current Cardiology Reports","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11886-024-02047-0","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose of Review

Risk models for mortality after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) are underutilized in clinical practice though they may be useful during informed consent, risk mitigation planning, and risk adjustment of hospital and operator outcomes. This review analyzed contemporary risk models for in-hospital and 30-day mortality after PCI.

Recent Findings

We reviewed eight contemporary risk models. Age, sex, hemodynamic status, acute coronary syndrome type, heart failure, and kidney disease were consistently found to be independent risk factors for mortality. These models provided good discrimination (C-statistic 0.85–0.95) for both pre-catheterization and comprehensive risk models that included anatomic variables.

Summary

There are several excellent models for PCI mortality risk prediction. Choice of the model will depend on the use case and population, though the CathPCI model should be the default for in-hospital mortality risk prediction in the United States. Future interventions should focus on the integration of risk prediction into clinical care.

Abstract Image

经皮冠状动脉介入治疗后住院和 30 天死亡率的现代风险模型
综述目的经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)后死亡率的风险模型在临床实践中应用不足,尽管这些模型在知情同意、风险缓解计划以及医院和操作者结果的风险调整中可能很有用。本综述分析了 PCI 术后院内死亡率和 30 天死亡率的当代风险模型。结果发现,年龄、性别、血液动力学状态、急性冠状动脉综合征类型、心力衰竭和肾脏疾病始终是死亡率的独立风险因素。这些模型对导管插入前和包括解剖变量的综合风险模型都有很好的区分度(C 统计量 0.85-0.95)。模型的选择取决于使用情况和人群,但在美国,CathPCI 模型应作为院内死亡率风险预测的默认模型。未来的干预措施应侧重于将风险预测纳入临床护理。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Current Cardiology Reports
Current Cardiology Reports CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS-
CiteScore
6.20
自引率
2.70%
发文量
209
期刊介绍: The aim of this journal is to provide timely perspectives from experts on current advances in cardiovascular medicine. We also seek to provide reviews that highlight the most important recently published papers selected from the wealth of available cardiovascular literature. We accomplish this aim by appointing key authorities in major subject areas across the discipline. Section editors select topics to be reviewed by leading experts who emphasize recent developments and highlight important papers published over the past year. An Editorial Board of internationally diverse members suggests topics of special interest to their country/region and ensures that topics are current and include emerging research. We also provide commentaries from well-known figures in the field.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信