Desfechos clínicos em 30 dias dos pacientes submetidos a intervenção coronária percutânea eletiva com alta no mesmo dia

Abstract

background: Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) has become one of the most commonly performed cardiac procedures in clinical practice. Due to improvement in outcomes, reduced acute complication rates, the need to reduce costs and the limited availability of hospital beds, elective PCI with same-day discharge has become an interesting option. Methods: Singlecenter registry with a retrospective evaluation of all patients undergoing elective PCI who were discharged on the same day, from January 2009 to March 2012. The rates of major adverse cardiac events (death, myocardial infarction, target-vessel revascularization and stroke), in addition to stent thrombosis, vascular complications and re-hospitalization between hospital discharge and the first 30 days of follow-up were determined. results: Sixty-nine patients were evaluated with mean age of 64.5 ± 11.2 years, most of them were male (82%), and 28% were diabetics. All patients had stable coronary artery disease and type A or B1 lesions (36% and 36% respectively). Radial access was the most commonly used approach (89%), with 5 F introducer sheaths in 56% and 6 F in the remaining patients. Procedure success was obtained in 98.5%. No clinical events were observed at the 30-day follow-up. Conclusions: Our results demonstrated that same-day discharge was safe for patients with low clinical and angiographic risk undergoing elective PCI with no procedurerelated complications.

Clinical outcomes of patients undergoing elective percutaneous coronary intervention with same-day discharge. Ten-year follow-up

“…2,3 Our outpatient PCI program in elective procedures began more than 10 years ago. When comparing the beginning of the program in 2009, as demonstrated by Trindade et al, 9 with the present time, we noticed an increase in cases of same-day discharge. In 2012, elective PCIs with same-day discharge represented 14% of all cases, increasing to 27.5% in 2020 (Figure 1).…”

Comparação entre os Tempos de Procedimento e Fluoroscopia e o Volume de Contraste das Vias de Acesso Radial e Femoral em Pacientes Submetidos a Cateterismo Cardíaco

“…Studies have demonstrated that the use of the radial route brings comfort to the patient and reduces the risk of bleeding, vascular complications, and hospitalization time, with lower costs. [1][2][3] However, there are conflicting data regarding the use of the radial route, in relation to the amount of contrast and increased exposure to ionizing radiation, which may be related to the learning curve of the operating physician or type of procedure. 4,5 In this context, this study was conducted in order to compare radial and femoral access routes in relation to total procedure and fluoroscopy times, as well as the volume of contrast used in patients undergoing cardiac catheterization.…”