Display options
Cite
Koolen KH, Mol KA, Rahel BM, et al. Off-site primary percutaneous coronary intervention in a new centre is safe: comparing clinical outcomes with a hospital with surgical backup. Neth Heart J. 2016;24(10):581-8doi: 10.1007/s12471-016-0872-0.
Koolen, K. H., Mol, K. A., Rahel, B. M., Eerens, F., Aydin, S., Troquay, R. P., Janssen, L., Tonino, W. A., & Meeder, J. G. (2016). Off-site primary percutaneous coronary intervention in a new centre is safe: comparing clinical outcomes with a hospital with surgical backup. Netherlands heart journal : monthly journal of the Netherlands Society of Cardiology and the Netherlands Heart Foundation, 24(10), 581-8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12471-016-0872-0
Koolen, K H A J, et al. "Off-site primary percutaneous coronary intervention in a new centre is safe: comparing clinical outcomes with a hospital with surgical backup." Netherlands heart journal : monthly journal of the Netherlands Society of Cardiology and the Netherlands Heart Foundation vol. 24,10 (2016): 581-8. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12471-016-0872-0
Koolen KH, Mol KA, Rahel BM, Eerens F, Aydin S, Troquay RP, Janssen L, Tonino WA, Meeder JG. Off-site primary percutaneous coronary intervention in a new centre is safe: comparing clinical outcomes with a hospital with surgical backup. Neth Heart J. 2016 Oct;24(10):581-8. doi: 10.1007/s12471-016-0872-0. PMID: 27595816; PMCID: PMC5039129.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

Neth Heart J. 2016 Oct;24(10):581-8. doi: 10.1007/s12471-016-0872-0.

Off-site primary percutaneous coronary intervention in a new centre is safe: comparing clinical outcomes with a hospital with surgical backup.

Netherlands heart journal : monthly journal of the Netherlands Society of Cardiology and the Netherlands Heart Foundation

K H A J Koolen, K A Mol, B M Rahel, F Eerens, S Aydin, R P T Troquay, L Janssen, W A L Tonino, J G Meeder

Affiliations

  1. Department of Cardiology, VieCuri Medical Centre, Venlo, The Netherlands. [email protected].
  2. Department of Cardiology, VieCuri Medical Centre, Venlo, The Netherlands.
  3. Department of Cardiology, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, The Netherlands.

PMID: 27595816 PMCID: PMC5039129 DOI: 10.1007/s12471-016-0872-0

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the procedural and clinical outcomes of a new primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI) centre without surgical back-up (off-site PCI) and to investigate whether these results are comparable with a high volume on-site PCI centre in the Netherlands.

BACKGROUND: Controversy remains about the safety and efficacy of PPCI in off-site PCI centres.

METHODS: We retrospectively analysed clinical and procedural data as well as 6‑month follow-up of 226 patients diagnosed with ST-elevated myocardial infarction (STEMI) who underwent PPCI at VieCuri Medical Centre Venlo and 115 STEMI patients who underwent PPCI at Catharina Hospital Eindhoven.

RESULTS: PPCI patients in VieCuri Medical Centre had similar procedural and clinical outcomes to those in Catharina Hospital. Overall there were no significant differences. The occurrence of procedural complications was low in both groups (8.4 % VieCuri vs. 12.3 % Catharina Hospital). In the VieCuri group there was one procedural-related death. No patients in either group needed emergency surgery. At 30 days, 17 (7.9 %) patients in the VieCuri group and 9 (8.1 %) in the Catharina Hospital group had a major adverse cardiac event.

CONCLUSION: Performing PPCI in an off-site PCI centre is safe and effective. The study results show that the procedural and clinical outcomes of an off-site PPCI centre are comparable with an on-site high-volume PPCI centre.

Keywords: Coronary disease; Off-site; Outcomes; Percutaneous coronary intervention; Primary

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of interestK.H.A.J. Koolen, K.A. Mol, B.M. Rahel, F. Eerens, S. Aydin, R.P.T. Troquay, L. Janssen, W.A.L. Tonino and J.G. Meeder state that they have no competing interest.

References

  1. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2009 Dec;2(6):519-27 - PubMed
  2. Lancet. 2003 Jan 4;361(9351):13-20 - PubMed
  3. Circulation. 2002 Oct 29;106(18):2346-50 - PubMed
  4. Neth Heart J. 2014 Nov;22(11):513-9 - PubMed
  5. Neth Heart J. 2007 May;15(5):173-7 - PubMed
  6. Neth Heart J. 2014 Nov;22(11):484-90 - PubMed
  7. Circulation. 2011 Jun 14;123(23):2736-47 - PubMed
  8. N Engl J Med. 2012 May 10;366(19):1814-23 - PubMed
  9. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2006 Apr 18;47(8):1713-21 - PubMed
  10. Neth Heart J. 2013 Oct;21(10):449-55 - PubMed
  11. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2005 Dec 6;46(11):2004-9 - PubMed
  12. Int J Cardiol. 2009 Feb 6;132(1):59-65 - PubMed
  13. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2011 Dec 6;58(24):e44-122 - PubMed
  14. Clin Res Cardiol. 2009 Nov;98(11):701-7 - PubMed
  15. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2004 Jun 2;43(11):1943-50 - PubMed
  16. Eur Heart J. 2012 Oct;33(20):2569-619 - PubMed
  17. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2009 Nov;2(6):574-82 - PubMed
  18. Eur Heart J. 2006 Apr;27(7):779-88 - PubMed
  19. Rev Esp Cardiol (Engl Ed). 2015 Feb;68(2):144 - PubMed
  20. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2009 Jun 30;54(1):16-24 - PubMed
  21. JAMA. 2011 Dec 14;306(22):2487-94 - PubMed
  22. Cardiovasc Revasc Med. 2013 Jan-Feb;14 (1):9-13 - PubMed
  23. Circulation. 2007 May 1;115(17):2344-51 - PubMed
  24. Circulation. 2006 Nov 7;114(19):2019-25 - PubMed
  25. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1993 Jun;21(7):1557-63 - PubMed

Publication Types