New approach towards diagnostic coronarography at hospitals without their own angiography laboratories
Abstract
Aim. To assess safety, clinical and cost-effectiveness of a new method for invasive examination in coronary heart disease (CHD) patients: ambulatory coronary angiography (CAG) in hospitalised or ambulatory patients of a city clinical hospital (CCH) not having its own angiography laboratory.
Material and methods. The study included 407 patients of the cardiology emergency department, Moscow CCH №51 (2001-2005), who underwent an ambulatory CAG at the angiography laboratory, Cardiology Research Institute, Russian Cardiology Scientific and Clinical Complex. Mean age of the participants was 56+10 years, with 281 (92 %) men, 236 (58 %) arterial hypertension (AH) patients, and 44 (11 %) diabetes mellitus (DM) patients. In total, 101 (25 %) and 17 (23 %) individuals were hospitalised to the CCH with myocardial infarction (MI) and unstable angina (UA) diagnosis, respectively.
Results. CAG was successful in all 407 participants, including 311 with radial access, and 94 with femoral access. Mean total CAG duration, from anaesthesia start to bandaging puncture area, was 21,7±11 minutes; mean time of X-ray radiation - 4,2±2,4 minutes. On average, 135±29 ml of contrast and 2,6±0,7 catheters were used per patient. Mean time from procedure end to discharge was 3,9±1,2 hours. No major complications were observed, minor complication prevalence was 5 %. In cost-effectiveness analysis, ambulatory CAG reduced procedure costs by 19 %, comparing to the control group.
Conclusion. Ambulatory CAG in CHD patients from a CCH without its own angiography laboratory, was safe, with low complication risk. Ambulatory CAG reduced mean procedure costs by 19 %, due to decreased hospitalisation expenses.
About the Authors
Yu. G. Matchin
Russian Cardiology Scientific and Clinical Complex
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
O. B. Privalova
Moscow City Clinical Hospital № 51. Moscow
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
D. V. Privalov
Moscow City Clinical Hospital № 51. Moscow
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
D. A. Zateyshchikov
Moscow City Clinical Hospital № 51. Moscow
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
S. A. Boytsov
Russian Cardiology Scientific and Clinical Complex
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
References
1. Praz L, Cook S, Meier B, et al. Percutaneous coronary interventions in Europe in 2005. EuroIntervention 2008; 3: 442-6.
2. Бокерия Л.А., Гудкова Р.Г. Сердечно-сосудистая хирургия -2005. Болезни и врожденные аномалии системы кровообращения. Москва «НЦССХ им. Бакулева РАМН» 2006; 9-29.
3. Campeau L. Percutaneous radial artery approach for coronary angiography. Cathet Cardiovasc Diagn 1989; 16: 3-7.
4. Chatelain P, Arceo A, Rombaut E, et al. New device for compression of the radial artery after diagnostic and interventional cardiac procedures. Cathet Cardiovasc Diagn 1997; 40: 297-300.
5. Ochiai M, Sakai H, Takeshita S, et al. Efficacy of a new hemostatic device, Adapty after transradial coronary angiography and intervention. J Invasive Cardiol 2000; 12: 618-22.
6. Dowling K, Todd D, Siskin G, et al. Early ambulation after diagnostic angiography using 4-F catheters and sheaths: a feasibility study. J Endovasc Ther 2002; 9: 618-21.
7. Gall S, Tarique A, Natarajan A, et al. Rapid ambulation after coronary angiography via femoral artery access: a prospective study of 1,000 patients. J Invasive Cardiol 2006; 18: 106-8.
8. Allen EV. Thromboangiitis obliterans: Methods of diagnosis of chronic occlusive arterial lesions distal to the wrist with illustrative cases. Am J Med Science 1929; 178-237.
9. Koch KT, Piek JJ, Prins MH, et al. Triage of patients for short term observation after elective coronary angioplasty. Heart 2000; 83: 557-63.
10. Scanlon PJ, Faxon DP, Audet AM. ACC/AHA Guidelines for Coronary Angiography. A report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines. JACC 1999; 33: 1756-824.
11. Klinke WP, Kubac G, Talibi T, et al. Safety of Outpatient Cardiac Cateterization. Am J Cardiol 1985; 56: 639-41.
12. Cooper CJ, El-Shieken RA, Cohen DJ,etal. Effect of transradial access on quality of life and cost of cardiac catheterization. Am Heart J 1999; 138: 430-6.
13. Banning AP, Ormerod OJM, Channon K, et al. Same day discharge following elective percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with stable angina. Heart 2003; 89: 665.
14. Slagboom T, Kiemeneij F, Laarman GJ, et al. Actual outpatient PTCA: results of the OUTCLAS pilot study. Catheter. Cardiovasc Interv 2001; 53: 204-8.
15. Slagboom T, Kiemeneij F, Laarman GJ, et al. Outpatient coronary angioplasty: feasible and safe. Catheter. Cardiovasc Interv 2005; 64: 421-7.
16. Матчин Ю.Г., Басинкевич А.Б., Орлова ЯА. и др. Безопасность и эффективность проведения диагностической коронарографии в амбулаторных условиях. Кардиологический Вестник. Бюлл РКНПК 2008; том III(XV): № 1: 35-9.
17. Lotan C, Hasin Y, Mosseru M, et al. Transradial approach to coronary angiography and angioplasty. Am J Cardiol 1995; 76: 164-7.
18. Fajadet J, Brunel P, Cassagneau B, et al. Transradial approach for interventional coronary procedures: analysis of complications. JACC 1996; 27: 392.
19. Kiemeheij F, Laarman GJ, Odekerken D, et al. A randomized comparison of percutaneous transluminal coronary angiography by the radial, brachial and femoral approaches: The ACCES study. JACC 1997; 29: 1269-75.
20. Reddy BK, Brewster PS, Walsh T, et al. Randomized comparison of rapid ambulation using radial, 4 French femoral access, or femoral access with AngioSeal closure. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2004; 62: 143-9.
21. Danzi GB, Capuano C, Sesana M, et al. A randomized comparison of the use of 4 and 6 French diagnostic catheters: the limits of downsizing. Int J Cardiol 2001; 79: 113-7.
22. Saito T, Date H, Taniguchi I, et al. Evaluation of new 4 French catheters by comparison to 6 French coronary artery images. J Invasive Cardiol 1999; 11: 13-20.
Review
For citations:
Matchin Yu.G., Privalova O.B., Privalov D.V., Zateyshchikov D.A., Boytsov S.A. New approach towards diagnostic coronarography at hospitals without their own angiography laboratories. Cardiovascular Therapy and Prevention. 2008;7(8):51-57. (In Russ.)
Views:
530
Email this article 
