ArticleAmerican journal of cardiovascular disease2020
Feasibility and safety of same-day discharge after percutaneous coronary intervention: a tertiary care center experience.
Article in American journal of cardiovascular disease, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The exponential increase in percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and increasing use of the transradial approach has set an ideal scenario for the cost-effective and relatively safe same-day discharge (SDD) policy in various institutes. We hereby report a single-center, prospective, observational study of 628 consecutive PCI patients, who had SDD or had overnight observation followed by next day discharge (NDD). Patients of chronic stable angina (CSA), unstable angina, and acute myocardial infarction (MI) were enrolled in the study. The baseline characteristics, safety, feasibility and 6 weeks of clinical outcomes were assessed in the two groups. Out of the 628 patients, 187 (30%) had SDD, and 358 (57%) had NDD. Transradial access was significantly more in SDD compared to NDD (P<0.001). The syntax score was significantly higher in NDD compared to the SDD (P<0.001). Five patients of NDD had clinical events at 6 weeks of follow-up, while none of SDD had any events. Patients with unstable angina (P = 0.024), MI (P≤0.001), prior PCI (P = 0.037), femoral access (P = 0.012), and high syntax score (P = 0.001) were more frequently discharged on next day. Factors such as CSA (P = 0.991), type of lesion (P = 0.984) and left ventricle ejection fraction (P = 0.535) were not the limiting factors for SDD. The present study demonstrated that SDD is safe and feasible in CSA patients, and a careful pre- and post-procedural risk assessment could enable SDD even in the complex cases.
Indexed as
Identifiers
33224578PMC7675153What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.