{"title":"经皮冠状动脉介入术后当日出院:随机对照试验的系统回顾和荟萃分析。","authors":"Ngoc Huy Nguyen, Thanh Ngoc Le, Hoai Thi Thu Nguyen, Tuan Minh Pham, Dung Viet Nguyen","doi":"10.15420/ecr.2025.21","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Over the past decade, significant advancements in percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) have substantially reduced periprocedural complications. These developments have also made same-day discharge (SDD) following PCI increasingly feasible. This study aims to provide the most up-to-date evidence on the safety of SDD through a synthesis of randomised controlled trial (RCT) results.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We systematically searched the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library and ClinicalTrials.gov databases for RCTs comparing the safety of SDD versus overnight stay (ONS) following PCI. Meta-analyses were conducted using a random effects model.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 14 RCTs comprising 3,215 patients (1,608 in the SDD group and 1,607 in the ONS group), primarily with chronic coronary syndrome or low-risk acute coronary syndrome, were included. Our meta-analysis demonstrated that SDD is as safe as ONS, as indicated by the comparable risks of adverse events, including major adverse cardiovascular events (pooled RR 0.76; 95% CI [0.46-1.27]), major bleeding (pooled RR 1.29; 95% CI [0.50-3.37]), vascular complications related to the access site (pooled RR 1.06; 95% CI [0.78-1.45]), rehospitalisation (pooled RR 1.15; 95% CI [0.79-1.68]) and unplanned hospital visits (pooled RR 1.02; 95% CI [0.73-1.42]) within 30 days post-PCI. The results remained robust, regardless of access site, timing of discharge or clinical presentation (all p for interaction >0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This up-to-date meta-analysis provides strong evidence supporting the safety of SDD compared with ONS after PCI. Further well-designed RCTs involving high-risk acute coronary syndrome patients are warranted to further clarify the safety of the SDD strategy in this population.</p>","PeriodicalId":93994,"journal":{"name":"European cardiology","volume":"20 ","pages":"e19"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12215418/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Same-day Discharge Following Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomised Controlled Trials.\",\"authors\":\"Ngoc Huy Nguyen, Thanh Ngoc Le, Hoai Thi Thu Nguyen, Tuan Minh Pham, Dung Viet Nguyen\",\"doi\":\"10.15420/ecr.2025.21\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Over the past decade, significant advancements in percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) have substantially reduced periprocedural complications. These developments have also made same-day discharge (SDD) following PCI increasingly feasible. This study aims to provide the most up-to-date evidence on the safety of SDD through a synthesis of randomised controlled trial (RCT) results.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We systematically searched the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library and ClinicalTrials.gov databases for RCTs comparing the safety of SDD versus overnight stay (ONS) following PCI. Meta-analyses were conducted using a random effects model.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 14 RCTs comprising 3,215 patients (1,608 in the SDD group and 1,607 in the ONS group), primarily with chronic coronary syndrome or low-risk acute coronary syndrome, were included. Our meta-analysis demonstrated that SDD is as safe as ONS, as indicated by the comparable risks of adverse events, including major adverse cardiovascular events (pooled RR 0.76; 95% CI [0.46-1.27]), major bleeding (pooled RR 1.29; 95% CI [0.50-3.37]), vascular complications related to the access site (pooled RR 1.06; 95% CI [0.78-1.45]), rehospitalisation (pooled RR 1.15; 95% CI [0.79-1.68]) and unplanned hospital visits (pooled RR 1.02; 95% CI [0.73-1.42]) within 30 days post-PCI. The results remained robust, regardless of access site, timing of discharge or clinical presentation (all p for interaction >0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This up-to-date meta-analysis provides strong evidence supporting the safety of SDD compared with ONS after PCI. Further well-designed RCTs involving high-risk acute coronary syndrome patients are warranted to further clarify the safety of the SDD strategy in this population.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":93994,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European cardiology\",\"volume\":\"20 \",\"pages\":\"e19\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12215418/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European cardiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.15420/ecr.2025.21\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European cardiology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15420/ecr.2025.21","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Same-day Discharge Following Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomised Controlled Trials.
Background: Over the past decade, significant advancements in percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) have substantially reduced periprocedural complications. These developments have also made same-day discharge (SDD) following PCI increasingly feasible. This study aims to provide the most up-to-date evidence on the safety of SDD through a synthesis of randomised controlled trial (RCT) results.
Methods: We systematically searched the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library and ClinicalTrials.gov databases for RCTs comparing the safety of SDD versus overnight stay (ONS) following PCI. Meta-analyses were conducted using a random effects model.
Results: A total of 14 RCTs comprising 3,215 patients (1,608 in the SDD group and 1,607 in the ONS group), primarily with chronic coronary syndrome or low-risk acute coronary syndrome, were included. Our meta-analysis demonstrated that SDD is as safe as ONS, as indicated by the comparable risks of adverse events, including major adverse cardiovascular events (pooled RR 0.76; 95% CI [0.46-1.27]), major bleeding (pooled RR 1.29; 95% CI [0.50-3.37]), vascular complications related to the access site (pooled RR 1.06; 95% CI [0.78-1.45]), rehospitalisation (pooled RR 1.15; 95% CI [0.79-1.68]) and unplanned hospital visits (pooled RR 1.02; 95% CI [0.73-1.42]) within 30 days post-PCI. The results remained robust, regardless of access site, timing of discharge or clinical presentation (all p for interaction >0.05).
Conclusion: This up-to-date meta-analysis provides strong evidence supporting the safety of SDD compared with ONS after PCI. Further well-designed RCTs involving high-risk acute coronary syndrome patients are warranted to further clarify the safety of the SDD strategy in this population.