Rates of Intraprocedural Adverse Events and Supportive Interventions During Percutaneous Coronary Interventions: A Single-Center, Retrospective Analysis

Ryan Quinn, MD, FRCPC; Aiman Alak, MD, FRCPC; Madhu Natarajan, MD, FRCPC, MSc;,,Ahmad Alshatti, MD, MRCP; Hussain Alzayer, MD, FRCPC; Matthew Sibbald, MD, FRCPC, MSc, PhD,,,,McMaster University, Department of Medicine, Division of Cardiology, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada,,,,

Single-Center Study

Rates of Intraprocedural Adverse Events and Supportive Interventions During Percutaneous Coronary Interventions: A Single-Center, Retrospective Analysis

Ryan Quinn, MD, FRCPC; Aiman Alak, MD, FRCPC; Madhu Natarajan, MD, FRCPC, MSc;
Ahmad Alshatti, MD, MRCP; Hussain Alzayer, MD, FRCPC; Matthew Sibbald, MD, FRCPC, MSc, PhD

McMaster University, Department of Medicine, Division of Cardiology, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada

July 2021

Editor's note: A pdf of this article is available for download at right (look for red pdf icon).

Abstract

Background: In percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) literature, major adverse events such as stroke, myocardial infarction (MI), bleeding, or death have been well studied. However, no studies have evaluated the types and rates of adverse events requiring intraprocedural supportive interventions that occur during PCI. We believe these may represent harbingers of future major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE).

Methods: We performed a retrospective chart review of 474 patients who received PCI from January to December 2017 at a single tertiary care center in Ontario, Canada. The primary outcome was a composite of any pharmacologic or mechanical intraprocedural supportive interventions. Secondary outcomes included the composite of any pharmacologic intraprocedural supportive interventions, the composite of any mechanical intraprocedural supportive interventions, and each intraprocedural supportive intervention analyzed separately. A univariate and multivariate regression analysis was performed on demographic and procedural variables.

Results: Over half (51.3%) of all patients received some form of intraprocedural supportive intervention, either pharmacologic or mechanical. One out of every six patients (16.0%) required two or more intraprocedural supportive interventions during their procedure. Compared to patients with elective PCI, those presenting with a non ST-elevation MI (NSTEMI) had a higher risk of requiring intraprocedural supportive interventions, with an odds ratio (OR) of 1.962 (confidence interval [CI] 1.021 to 3.771, P=.043) and those presenting with ST-elevation MI (STEMI) had an OR of 3.304 (CI 1.747 to 6.246, P<.001).

Conclusion: During PCI, there is a high rate of events that require some form of intraprocedural supportive intervention. Those who present with NSTEMI and STEMI are at a higher risk of requiring intraprocedural supportive interventions. These may represent sentinel events for major adverse patient events and the anticipation of cases that have a higher chance of requiring intraprocedural supportive interventions may improve coordinated team dynamics.

Please Log In To View

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet consectetur adipiscing elit eget tincidunt metus quam placerat justo magna, interdum risus et faucibus habitasse laoreet gravida porttitor leo quisque dis litora. Elementum faucibus turpis platea habitasse venenatis suspendisse blandit, nullam cras lectus sollicitudin conubia nascetur velit, ridiculus quisque porta aptent sodales iaculis. Himenaeos sit ultricies nunc laoreet ultrices a ante rhoncus proin, suspendisse sodales dolor magna phasellus duis mattis imperdiet habitant sem, accumsan torquent quisque tincidunt ut risus taciti malesuada. Eget adipiscing bibendum ligula eros aptent habitant lacinia dolor dis, nullam mollis integer neque mauris a nisi. Aliquet risus ac ullamcorper scelerisque elementum placerat consequat semper non magna efficitur, et varius eget luctus justo nec nunc nostra dictumst cubilia. Orci taciti cras tellus commodo finibus lorem ligula risus mollis, dui quisque suspendisse posuere aliquet ipsum inceptos nunc nisi tincidunt, felis phasellus pulvinar neque elementum ex ridiculus at. Mattis ac quam ex sollicitudin tincidunt, augue vehicula hendrerit.

Maecenas mus sollicitudin libero convallis mattis lobortis consequat turpis primis eros montes auctor porta eget, curae mauris fermentum nascetur facilisi dolor faucibus cras taciti sit suspendisse parturient penatibus. Parturient placerat torquent egestas senectus pharetra cubilia magna finibus quam, tellus ligula mauris justo purus porta pellentesque eu sollicitudin id, etiam arcu litora et iaculis bibendum curabitur facilisis. Tortor conubia mus vivamus sodales euismod eros tempor purus, primis ligula montes nostra posuere luctus platea dignissim, urna elementum habitasse ultricies commodo blandit a. Magna cras torquent nulla dapibus erat mus odio, proin felis euismod et eu massa nullam ac, convallis ex pellentesque adipiscing conubia faucibus. Vel tempor nascetur torquent integer lobortis netus, iaculis magnis id nec porttitor nisi accumsan, nullam ut suspendisse orci dignissim.

Sollicitudin mi netus orci tortor porttitor ornare faucibus, lorem porta magna lacus urna. Ullamcorper arcu urna orci proin montes sollicitudin felis nec, nulla a consectetur nullam eros et sit, rutrum conubia aliquam metus sociosqu aenean dignissim. Ornare faucibus eros fringilla malesuada nec porttitor efficitur risus, mi praesent phasellus platea id aliquet vestibulum himenaeos gravida, pulvinar dictum blandit posuere senectus erat vulputate. Dapibus natoque ante nulla malesuada hac pellentesque efficitur nisi, leo sit congue vel enim sapien hendrerit, ad platea tellus euismod nostra in purus. Dui neque dapibus malesuada habitasse suscipit iaculis porttitor, eu maximus pharetra nascetur augue blandit lacinia praesent, est urna sit semper congue himenaeos. Nec ipsum feugiat elementum sagittis volutpat lacinia auctor class suscipit viverra, ut sociosqu phasellus curae dis cras accumsan maecenas vestibulum, praesent scelerisque felis proin justo augue dui ridiculus pulvinar. Vulputate taciti proin varius duis feugiat molestie, efficitur neque montes fringilla felis semper velit, vel maximus netus cubilia volutpat.

Sapien cubilia cursus tristique accumsan convallis, montes pharetra purus lacinia ipsum sagittis, sem quam donec aenean. Nec integer ex pretium viverra donec commodo ad litora, semper euismod etiam lacinia varius suscipit in faucibus, augue dapibus taciti eget gravida senectus ultrices. Vehicula proin luctus dolor torquent penatibus curabitur volutpat magnis, dictum mi malesuada pharetra suspendisse sodales tellus, nisi aliquet accumsan senectus posuere maecenas molestie. Condimentum etiam faucibus suscipit egestas hendrerit curabitur massa tortor finibus, quisque gravida nunc inceptos turpis sociosqu est sollicitudin, velit quis mauris amet imperdiet diam mi orci. Magna rutrum habitasse arcu habitant augue senectus nascetur dis pellentesque netus blandit, tortor ullamcorper gravida parturient conubia nec phasellus nullam nulla mi. Rutrum urna est tortor porta dui vivamus enim nascetur ex, felis class egestas fusce finibus interdum nostra hendrerit porttitor, scelerisque semper ridiculus ac pellentesque molestie congue iaculis. Maximus pulvinar litora himenaeos dignissim turpis vel semper ullamcorper sollicitudin at interdum, vulputate sem justo natoque nunc nulla felis arcu nam elit varius, euismod parturient ad venenatis orci faucibus aliquet pellentesque tellus tincidunt. Accumsan justo mi neque erat porta id diam, pellentesque risus gravida semper nam facilisi felis a, congue taciti non augue lacinia adipiscing.

Libero montes proin ad facilisis phasellus cubilia, nisl tincidunt odio diam congue aptent pulvinar, placerat id est aliquet dis. Nulla pulvinar arcu ex taciti mattis nisi ornare eget bibendum, himenaeos cras ut eu consectetur magnis malesuada conubia, libero curabitur pretium auctor nam at parturient commodo. Tincidunt nisl id etiam facilisis urna ut malesuada dictumst neque fermentum, vivamus magnis nec feugiat torquent metus platea suscipit ante, primis commodo interdum faucibus posuere justo praesent dis sagittis. Eget elementum sollicitudin etiam cras dis dictum, penatibus quam habitasse consectetur aenean id quis, dolor diam dignissim lorem aliquet. Dui id proin faucibus posuere elementum felis urna ullamcorper, ut himenaeos curabitur luctus quisque hac ligula tincidunt condimentum, penatibus pharetra sodales non sit neque sem. Nascetur aptent posuere auctor luctus cras eget quisque in, mollis bibendum augue malesuada donec ac purus nisi ut, pellentesque imperdiet dolor odio primis suscipit nec.

Duis ipsum lacinia ultricies curae maecenas semper consectetur ex enim finibus himenaeos, nostra in dapibus id a phasellus lobortis non rhoncus. Aliquet consectetur ligula hac nisi sociosqu lacus gravida velit, ornare id curabitur viverra adipiscing netus magna porttitor, pharetra euismod iaculis nec metus laoreet eu. Neque arcu etiam at dui praesent varius rhoncus aptent parturient elit, nostra suscipit tortor natoque primis maximus inceptos volutpat ultrices luctus est, convallis porta tincidunt mi non consequat lacus duis platea. Aliquam fringilla fermentum pellentesque nostra molestie adipiscing vulputate integer, bibendum varius laoreet rutrum parturient sociosqu ac, habitant iaculis efficitur himenaeos nec donec libero. Felis nullam maximus donec ac suscipit tincidunt netus massa integer ut facilisis, ex lectus elementum interdum himenaeos lacinia porta nunc feugiat dolor, nisi non justo fusce metus nulla tristique velit facilisi eget. Magnis efficitur taciti placerat mus fringilla in dis, nascetur suscipit sodales tortor vehicula libero, condimentum nisl neque euismod sociosqu facilisis. Orci fringilla vulputate nisi vel duis tellus ligula semper maximus, dolor condimentum egestas mollis nisl molestie cras blandit metus, magna aptent varius sagittis aliquet velit urna torquent.

Lacinia rhoncus enim himenaeos posuere sagittis molestie natoque habitasse, velit augue mi montes malesuada iaculis rutrum taciti tempor, sapien fames ipsum inceptos eros ante nunc. Integer turpis ultrices interdum elit nascetur platea himenaeos malesuada est, gravida sollicitudin fusce nisi libero id suscipit ut molestie lacus, vestibulum nam torquent tincidunt ullamcorper dictumst efficitur primis. Mollis ut lacus nostra praesent mus nisi id quis, dis interdum ex mi libero himenaeos justo consectetur nascetur, blandit purus porttitor mattis elit ornare euismod. Iaculis etiam rutrum nullam mattis urna himenaeos nam sagittis suscipit, rhoncus nascetur nostra lacus adipiscing purus orci bibendum habitasse fusce, integer cubilia non inceptos aliquet praesent curae neque. Phasellus donec tortor aptent libero semper ad ultrices lorem auctor, ipsum lacus pharetra ex sodales netus finibus dolor sagittis, hac urna imperdiet eget augue ac montes magna. Leo ac nostra blandit in vehicula lacinia mi vestibulum ultricies, a eget maecenas curae nec adipiscing facilisis tortor lobortis, platea scelerisque neque sollicitudin egestas dictum tristique dictumst.

References

1. Chan PS, Klein LW, Krone RJ, et al. Appropriateness of percutaneous coronary intervention. JAMA. 2011; 306(1): 53-61.

2. Serruys P, Morice M, Kappetein A. Percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary-artery bypass grafting for severe coronary artery disease. N Engl J Med. 2009; 360(10): 961-972.

3. Farkouh ME, Domanski M, Sleeper LA. Strategies for multivessel revascularization in patients with diabetes. N Engl J Med. 2018; 367(25): 2375-2384. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1211585

4. Joner M, Schunkert H, Kastrati A, Byrne RA. Percutaneous coronary intervention vs coronary artery bypass grafting in patients with left main coronary artery stenosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA Cardiol. 2017 Oct 1; 2(10): 1079-1088.

5. Kirtane AJ, Doshi D, Leon MB, et al. Treatment of higher-risk patients with an indication for revascularization: evolution within the field of contemporary percutaneous coronary intervention. Circulation. 2016 Aug 2; 134(5): 422-31. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.116.022061

6. Badheka AO, Patel NJ, Grover P, et al. Impact of annual operator and institutional volume on percutaneous coronary intervention outcomes: A 5-year United States experience (2005-2009). Circulation. 2014; 130(16): 1392-1406. doi:10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.114.009281

7. Dehmer GJ, Weaver D, Roe MT, et al. A contemporary view of diagnostic cardiac catheterization and percutaneous coronary intervention in the United States: A report from the CathPCI registry of the national cardiovascular data registry, 2010 through June 2011. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2012; 60(20): 2017-2031. doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2012.08.966

8. Iverson A, Stanberry LI, Tajti P, et al. Prevalence, trends, and outcomes of higher-risk percutaneous coronary interventions among patients without acute coronary syndromes. Cardiovasc Revasc Med. 2019 Apr; 20(4): 289-292. doi: 10.1016/j.carrev.2018.07.017

9. Jolly SS, Yusuf S, Cairns J, et al. Radial versus femoral access for coronary angiography and intervention in patients with acute coronary syndromes (RIVAL): A randomised, parallel group, multicentre trial. Lancet. 2011; 377(9775): 1409-1420. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(11)60404-2

10. Macrae C. Making risks visible: Identifying and interpreting threats to airline flight safety. J Occup Organ Psychol. 2009; 82(2): 273-293. doi:10.1348/096317908X314045

11. Barach P, Small SD. Reporting and preventing medical mishaps: lessons from non-medical near miss reporting systems. BMJ. 2000; 320(7237): 759-763.

12. Sardar P, Abbott J, Kundu A, et al. Impact of artificial intelligence on interventional cardiology. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2019; 12(14): 1293-1303. doi:10.1016/j.jcin.2019.04.048

13. Roshanov PS, Sheth T, Duceppe E, et al. Relationship between perioperative hypotension and perioperative cardiovascular events in patients with coronary artery disease undergoing major noncardiac surgery. Anesthesiology. 2019 May; 130(5): 756-766. doi: 10.1097/ALN.0000000000002654

14. Monk T, Bronsert M, Henderson W, et al. Association between intraoperative hypotension and hypertension and 30-day postoperative mortality in noncardiac surgery. Anesthesiology. 2015 Aug; 123(2): 307-319. doi: 10.1097/ALN.0000000000000756

15. Wesselink EM, Kappen TH, Torn HM, et al. Intraoperative hypotension and the risk of postoperative adverse outcomes: a systematic review. Br J Anaesth. 2018; 121(4): 706-721. doi:10.1016/j.bja.2018.04.036

16. Vascular Events In Noncardiac Surgery Patients Cohort Evaluation (VISION) Study Investigators; Devereaux PJ, Chan MTV, Alonso-Coello P, et al. Association between postoperative troponin levels and 30-day mortality among patients undergoing noncardiac surgery. JAMA. 2012 Jun 6; 307(21): 2295-304. doi: 10.1001/jama.2012.5502.

17. Eikelboom JW, Mehta SR, Anand SS, et al. Adverse impact of bleeding on prognosis in patients with acute coronary syndromes. Circulation. 2006; 114(8): 774-782. doi:10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.106.612812

18. Daugherty SL, Thompson LE, Kim S, et al. Patterns of use and comparative effectiveness of bleeding avoidance strategies in men and women following percutaneous coronary interventions: an observational study from the National Cardiovascular Data Registry. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2013 May 21;61(20):2070-8. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2013.02.030

19. Dauerman HL, Rao SV, Resnic FS, Applegate RJ. Bleeding avoidance strategies. Consensus and controversy. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2011 Jun 28; 58(1): 1-10. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2011.02.039

20. Göras C, Nilsson U, Ekstedt M, et al. Managing complexity in the operating room: a group interview study. BMC Health Serv Res. 2020 May 19; 20(1): 440. doi: 10.1186/s12913-020-05192-8

21. Haynes AB, Weiser TG, Berry WR, et al. A surgical safety checklist to reduce morbidity and mortality in a global population. N Engl J Med. 2009; 360(5): 491-499. doi:10.1056/NEJMsa0810119

22. Lindsay AC, Bishop J, Harron K, et al. Use of a safe procedure checklist in the cardiac catheterisation laboratory. BMJ Open Qual. 2018; 7(3): e000074. doi:10.1136/bmjoq-2017-000074

23. Cahill TJ, Clarke SC, Simpson IA, Stables RH. A patient safety checklist for the cardiac catheterisation laboratory. Heart. 2015; 101(2): 91-93. doi:10.1136/heartjnl-2014-306927