Vše

Co hledáte?

Vše
Projekty
Výsledky výzkumu
Subjekty

Rychlé hledání

  • Projekty podpořené TA ČR
  • Významné projekty
  • Projekty s nejvyšší státní podporou
  • Aktuálně běžící projekty

Chytré vyhledávání

  • Takto najdu konkrétní +slovo
  • Takto z výsledků -slovo zcela vynechám
  • “Takto můžu najít celou frázi”

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

Identifikátory výsledku

  • Kód výsledku v 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>

  • Výsledek na webu

    <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>

Alternativní jazyky

  • Jazyk výsledku

    angličtina

  • Název v původním jazyce

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

  • Popis výsledku v původním jazyce

    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.

  • Název v anglickém jazyce

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

  • Popis výsledku anglicky

    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.

Klasifikace

  • Druh

    J<sub>x</sub> - Nezařazeno - Článek v odborném periodiku (Jimp, Jsc a Jost)

  • CEP obor

    FA - Kardiovaskulární nemoci včetně kardiochirurgie

  • OECD FORD obor

Návaznosti výsledku

  • Projekt

  • Návaznosti

    N - Vyzkumna aktivita podporovana z neverejnych zdroju

Ostatní

  • Rok uplatnění

    2014

  • Kód důvěrnosti údajů

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

Údaje specifické pro druh výsledku

  • Název periodika

    Journal of the American College of Cardiology

  • ISSN

    0735-1097

  • e-ISSN

  • Svazek periodika

    63

  • Číslo periodika v rámci svazku

    10

  • Stát vydavatele periodika

    US - Spojené státy americké

  • Počet stran výsledku

    10

  • Strana od-do

    954-963

  • Kód UT WoS článku

    000332529400003

  • EID výsledku v databázi Scopus

    2-s2.0-84896097881