Hoffmann, R. A wiki for the life sciences where authorship matters. Nature Genetics (2008)

Editor

Personal info

View

About

Terms

Javascript disabled

Please enable Javascript support in your browser to use this application.

Instructions on how to enable JavaScript on different browsers can be found here: http://www.google.com/support/bin/answer.py?answer=23852.

[edit this page]

Laskey, W.K. et al.

Laskey, Selzer, Jacobs, Cohen, Holmes, Wilensky, Detre, Williams,

Importance of the postdischarge interval in assessing major adverse clinical event rates following percutaneous coronary intervention.

In-hospital major adverse clinical event (MACE) rates after percutaneous coronary intervention serve as benchmarks of performance. However, accelerated clinical pathways, decreased lengths of stay, and potential delayed effects of percutaneous coronary intervention may result in an underestimation of this traditional measurement of outcome. Records from patients in the first 3 waves of the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute's Dynamic Registry (n = 6,676) were reviewed for rates of composite in-hospital MACEs (death, myocardial infarction, and any repeat target vessel revascularization) and postdischarge MACEs (death, myocardial infarction, repeat hospitalization, and repeat target vessel revascularization) through 30 days. Rates for each composite MACE were compared across waves to assess changes over time. Predictors of each MACE category were identified using multivariate analysis. In-hospital MACE decreased significantly (5.4% of wave 1, 4.9% of wave 2, 3.1% of wave 3, p <0.001), whereas stent implantation increased significantly (67.5% of wave 1, 79.1% of wave 2, 86.2% of wave 3, p <0.001). Postdischarge MACE through 30 days remained unchanged (5.1% of wave 1, 5.1% of wave 2, 4.8% of wave 3, p = 0.6). Mean length of stay decreased (2.7 days for wave 1, 2.2 days for wave 3, p <0.001). Disparate clinical, procedural, and angiographic factors were associated with each MACE. Postdischarge MACE rates through 30 days comprise a significant and unchanging fraction of overall procedurally related MACE rates despite improving in-hospital outcomes. Most postdischarge events derive from pathology related to the controlled vessel. A 30-day MACE rate may serve as a more comprehensive measurement of procedural outcome.[1]

References

Importance of the postdischarge interval in assessing major adverse clinical event rates following percutaneous coronary intervention. Laskey, W.K., Selzer, F., Jacobs, A.K., Cohen, H.A., Holmes, D.R., Wilensky, R.L., Detre, K.M., Williams, D.O. Am. J. Cardiol. (2005) [Pubmed]

Annotations and hyperlinks in this abstract are from individual authors of WikiGenes or automatically generated by the WikiGenes Data Mining Engine. The abstract is from MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine.About WikiGenes Open Access Licence Privacy Policy Terms of Use apsburg

The world's first wiki where authorship really matters (Nature Genetics, 2008). Due credit and reputation for authors. Imagine a global collaborative knowledge base for original thoughts. Search thousands of articles and collaborate with scientists around the globe.