All

What are you looking for?

All
Projects
Results
Organizations

Quick search

  • Projects supported by TA ČR
  • Excellent projects
  • Projects with the highest public support
  • Current projects

Smart search

  • That is how I find a specific +word
  • That is how I leave the -word out of the results
  • “That is how I can find the whole phrase”

Procedural Volume and Outcomes with Radial or Femoral access for coronary angiography and intervention

The result's identifiers

  • Result code in IS VaVaI

    <a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F00216208%3A11120%2F14%3A43908086" target="_blank" >RIV/00216208:11120/14:43908086 - isvavai.cz</a>

  • Result on the web

    <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2013.10.052" target="_blank" >http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2013.10.052</a>

  • DOI - Digital Object Identifier

    <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2013.10.052" target="_blank" >10.1016/j.jacc.2013.10.052</a>

Alternative languages

  • Result language

    angličtina

  • Original language name

    Procedural Volume and Outcomes with Radial or Femoral access for coronary angiography and intervention

  • Original language description

    To evaluate the relationship between procedural volume and outcomes with radial and femoral approach. BACKGROUND: RIVAL was a randomized trial of radial vs. femoral access for coronary angiography/ intervention (N=7021) which overall did not show a difference in primary outcome of death, MI, stroke or non-CABG major bleeding. METHODS: In pre-specified subgroup analyses, the hazard ratios for the primary outcome were compared i) among centres divided by tertiles and ii) among individual operators. A multivariable cox proportional hazards model was used to determine the independent effect of centre and operator volumes after adjusting for other variables. RESULTS: In high volume radial centres, the primary outcome was reduced with radial vs. femoral access (hazard ratio (HR) 0.49; 95%CI 0.28-0.87) but not in intermediate (HR 1.23; 95%CI 0.88-1.72) or low volume centres (HR 0.83; 95%CI 0.52-1.31); interaction p=0.021. High volume centres enrolled a higher proportion of STEMI. After adjustment for STEMI, the benefit of radial persisted at high volume radial centers. There was no difference in the primary outcome between radial and femoral access by operator volume: high volume operators (HR 0.79; 95%CI 0.48-1.28), intermediate (HR 0.87; 95%CI 0.60-1.27) and low (HR 1.10; 95%CI0.74-1.65); interaction p=0.536. However, in a multivariable model, overall centre volume and radial centre volume were independently associated with the primary outcome but not femoral centre volume (overall PCI volume HR 0.92; 95%CI 0.88-0.96, radial volume HR 0.88; 95%CI0.80-0.97 and femoral volume HR 1.00; 95%CI 0.94-1.07, p=0.98). CONCLUSIONS: Procedural volume and expertise are important, particularly for radial PCI.

  • Czech name

  • Czech description

Classification

  • Type

    J<sub>x</sub> - Unclassified - Peer-reviewed scientific article (Jimp, Jsc and Jost)

  • CEP classification

    FA - Cardiovascular diseases including cardio-surgery

  • OECD FORD branch

Result continuities

  • Project

  • Continuities

    N - Vyzkumna aktivita podporovana z neverejnych zdroju

Others

  • Publication year

    2014

  • Confidentiality

    S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů

Data specific for result type

  • Name of the periodical

    Journal of the American College of Cardiology

  • ISSN

    0735-1097

  • e-ISSN

  • Volume of the periodical

    63

  • Issue of the periodical within the volume

    10

  • Country of publishing house

    US - UNITED STATES

  • Number of pages

    10

  • Pages from-to

    954-963

  • UT code for WoS article

    000332529400003

  • EID of the result in the Scopus database

    2-s2.0-84896097881