Official Journal Health Science of Prince of Songkla University

  • Home
  • Search
  • Current
  • Archives
  • Announcements
  • Guide for Authors
  • Publication Ethics
  • Editorial Board
  • Submit
  • About
  • Contact
  • Online-first Articles
  • EVENTS
  • Review Process
Home > Vol 38, No 3 (2020) > Charoensin

Vascular Complications from Coronary Angiography/Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Comparing Day Case Patients and Inpatients in a Tertiary Hospital in Thailand: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Chantana Charoensin, Ratchanee Srichai, Thammasin Ingviya

Abstract

Objective: To compare the incidence along with risk factors of vascular complications between patients having undergone Coronary angiography/Percutaneous Coronary Interventions (CAG/PCIs); as day cases and those as inpatients.
Material and Methods: Our study is a retrospective cohort study. We performed a retrospective chart review of the patients, visiting a heart center of the hospital from October, 2014 to September, 2018. We included patients of a minimum 18 years of age, who had undergone CAG/PCIs. Excluded patients were those who had been referred from other hospitals. The main outcomes were vascular complications defined as: (1) bleeding with significant blood loss during the procedure. (2) Hematoma within 1 month after the procedure. Wilcoxon’s rank sum and chi-squared test were used to assess the risk factors.
Results: Of all 784 patients having undergone CAG/PCI, 387 were day cases and 397 were inpatients. Only 12 cases developed vascular complications. The incidence of vascular complications was not significantly different between either day case; whose incidence was 1.3% (95% confidence interval (CI), 0.72-1.87), and inpatients; whose incidence was 1.8% (95% CI, 1.10-2.42). We found that the risk factors of vascular complications were percutaneous coronary intervention, and using a vascular closure device to remove the introducer sheath.
Conclusion: Performing CAG/PCI as day cases did not increase the risks of complications post-procedure, as compare to the inpatients. However, due to the small numbers of patients with complications future studies with more patients are needed to ensure the safety of day case CAG/PCI. Patients undergoing PCI, or patients with vascular closure devices used should be closely observed before discharge.

 Keywords

cardiac catheterization; day case; percutaneous coronary intervention; vascular complications

 Full Text:

PDF

References

Alpert JS, Thygesen K, Antman E, Bassand JP. Myocardial infarction redefined--a consensus document of The Joint European Society of Cardiology/American College of Cardiology Committee for the redefinition of myocardial infarction. J Am Coll Cardiol 2000;36:959–69.

Baim DS, Grossman W. Complications. In: Baim DS, Grossman W, editors. Grossman’s cardiac catheterization. 8th ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williums and Wilkins; 2000;p.65.

Muthusamy P, Busman DK, Davis AT, Wohns DH. Assessment of clinical outcomes related to early discharge after elective percutaneous coronary intervention: COED PCI. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv Off J Soc Card Angiogr Interv 2013;81:6–13.

Rao SV, Kaltenbach LA, Weintraub WS, Roe MT, Brindis RG, Rumsfeld JS, et al. Prevalence and outcomes of sameday discharge after elective percutaneous coronary intervention among older patients. JAMA 2011;306:1461–7.

Brayton KM, Patel VG, Stave C, de Lemos JA, Kumbhani DJ. Same-day discharge after percutaneous coronary intervention: a meta-analysis. J Am Coll Cardiol 2013;62:275–85.

Chambers CE, Dehmer GJ, Cox DA, Harrington RA, Babb JD, Popma JJ, et al. Defining the length of stay following percutaneous coronary intervention: an expert consensus document from the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions. Endorsed by the American College of Cardiology Foundation. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2009;73:847–58.

Ramharrack DV, Jurgens CY, Shlofmitz RA. Phenotype of same-day-discharge patients after percutaneous coronary intervention. J Cardiovasc Nurs 2018;33:160–7.

Shroff A, Kupfer J, Gilchrist IC, Caputo R, Speiser B, Bertrand OF, et al. Same-day discharge after percutaneous coronary intervention: current perspectives and strategies for mmplementation. JAMA Cardiol 2016;1:216–23.

Bundhun PK, Soogund MZS, Huang W-Q. Same day discharge versus overnight stay in the hospital following percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with stable coronary artery disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. PLOS ONE 2017;12:e0169807

Seto AH, Shroff A, Abu-Fadel M, Blankenship JC, Boudoulas KD, Cigarroa JE, et al. Length of stay following percutaneous coronary intervention: an expert consensus document update from the society for cardiovascular angiography and interventions. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2018;92:717–31.

Supa J, Ratchanee N. Factors related to the occurrence of vascular complications among patients receiving percutaneous coronary Interventions via the Femoral Artery. APHEIT J 2017;6:14–24.

Applegate RJ, Grabarczyk MA, Little WC, Craven T, Walkup M, Kahl FR, et al. Vascular closure devices in patients treated with anticoagulation and iib/iiia receptor inhibitors during percutaneous revascularization. J Am Coll Cardiol 2002;40:78–83.

Christensen BV, Manion RV, Iacarella CL, Meyer SM, Cartland JL, Bruhn-Ding BJ, et al. Vascular complications after angiography with and without the use of sandbags. Nurs Res 1998;47:51–3.

Dangas G, Mehran R, Kokolis S, Feldman D, Satler LF, Pichard AD, et al. Vascular complications after percutaneous coronary interventions following hemostasis with manual compression versus arteriotomy closure devices. J Am Coll Cardiol 2001;38:638–41.

Nikolsky E, Mehran R, Halkin A, Aymong ED, Mintz GS, Lasic Z, et al. Vascular complications associated with arteriotomy closure devices in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary procedures. J Am Coll Cardiol 2004;44:1200–9.

Elzik ME, Dirschl DR, Dahners LE. Correlation of transfusion volume to change in hematocrit. Am J Hematol 2006;81:145–6.

Al Sadi AKA, Omeish AFY, Al-Zaru IM. Timing and predictors of femoral haematoma development after manual compression of femoral access sites. JPMA J Pak Med Assoc 2010;60:620–5.

Shao J, Chow SC, Wang H. Sample size calculations in clinical research. 2nd ed. Florida: CRC Press; 2003.

Yates F. Contingency table involving small numbers and the χ2 test. J R Stat Soc 1934;(Suppl 1):S217–35.

Abdelaal E, Rao SV, Gilchrist IC, Bernat I, Shroff A, Caputo R, et al. Same-day discharge compared with overnight hospitalization after uncomplicated percutaneous coronary intervention: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JACC Cardiovasc Interv 2013;6:99–112.

Koch KT, Piek JJ, Winter RJ de, David GK, Mulder K, Lie KI. Short-term (4 Hours) observation after elective coronary angioplasty. Am J Cardiol 1997;80:1591–4.

Jones T, McCutcheon H. A randomised controlled trial comparing the use of manual versus mechanical compression to obtain haemostasis following coronary angiography. Intensive Crit Care Nurs 2003;19:11–20.

Lehmann KG, Heath-Lange SJ, Ferris ST. Randomized comparison of hemostasis techniques after invasive cardiovascular procedures. Am Heart J 1999;138:1118–25.

Sekhar A, Sutton BS, Raheja P, Mohsen A, Anggelis E, Anggelis CN, et al. Femoral arterial closure using ProGlide® is more efficacious and cost-effective when ambulating early following cardiac catheterization. Int J Cardiol Heart Vasc 2016;13:6–13.

Capasso VA, Codner C, Nuzzo-Meuller G, Cox EM, Bouvier S. Peripheral arterial sheath removal program: a performance improvement initiative. J Vasc Nurs 2006;24:127–32.

Walker SB, Cleary S, Higgins M. Comparison of the Femo Stop device and manual pressure in reducing groin puncture site complications following coronary angioplasty and coronary stent placement. Int J Nurs Pract 2001;7:366–75.

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.31584/jhsmr.2020739

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

SUBMIT A PAPER

JHSMR accepts online submission through

AHR-iCON 2024

Journal Metrics


2020
Acceptance rate: 52%
2021
Acceptance rate: 27.8%
2022 (March)
Acceptance rate: 15.6%
2023 (June)
Acceptance rate: 23.6%


Submission to final decision
74 days

Acceptance to publication
40 days

SCImago Journal & Country Rank

About The Authors

Chantana Charoensin
Naradhiwas Rajanagarindra Heart Center, Faculty of Medicine, Prince of Songkla University, Songkhla 90110,
Thailand

Ratchanee Srichai
Naradhiwas Rajanagarindra Heart Center, Faculty of Medicine, Prince of Songkla University, Songkhla 90110,
Thailand

Thammasin Ingviya
Department of Family and Preventive Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Prince of Songkla University, Songkhla 90110,
Thailand

Article Tools
Abstract
Print this article
Indexing metadata
How to cite item
Email this article (Login required)
Email the author (Login required)

Supported by

 

JHSMR now Indexed in



Scopus logo.svg






Image result for crossref





PSUMJ Homepage

Keywords COVID-19 SARS-CoV-2 Thailand Vietnam anxiety children computed tomography depression diabetes diabetes mellitus elderly hypertension knowledge mental health mortality prevalence quality of life risk factors stroke treatment validity
Journal Content

Browse
  • By Issue
  • By Author
  • By Title
Font Size
Make font size smaller Make font size default Make font size larger

Open Journal Systems