Search

In the OPUS-I trial, primary coronary stent implantation reduced 6-month composite incidence of death, myocardial infarction, cardiac surgery, or target vessel revascularization relative to a strategy of initial PTCA with provisional stenting in patients undergoing single vessel coronary angioplasty. The purpose of this research was to compare the economic and health status impacts of each treatment strategy. Resource utilization data were collected for the 479 patients randomized in OPUS-I. Itemized cost estimates were derived from primary hospital charge data gathered in previous multicenter trials evaluating coronary stents, and adjusted to approximate 1997 Medicare-based costs for a cardiac population. Health status at 6 months was assessed using the Seattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ). Initial procedure related costs for patients treated with a primary stent strategy were higher than those treated with optimal PTCA/provisional stent ($5,389 vs $4,339, P < 0.001). Costs of initial hospitalization were also higher for patients in the primary stent group ($9,234 vs $8,434, P < 0.01) chiefly because of the cost differences in the index revascularization. Mean 6-month costs were similar in the two groups; however, there was a slight cost advantage associated with primary stenting. Bootstrap replication of 6-month cost data sustained the economic attractiveness of the primary stent strategy. There were no differences in SAQ scores between treatment groups. In patients undergoing single vessel coronary angioplasty, routine stent implantation improves important clinical outcomes at comparable, or even reduced cost, compared to a strategy of initial balloon angioplasty with provisional stenting.

Recent results from Medicare indicated that both hospital mortality and the use of same admission coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery were lower in patients receiving stents, and that stenting did not alter the finding of improved outcomes at high volume centers. The purpose of this report is to compare outcomes in a national sample of patients of all ages receiving stents with those undergoing conventional balloon angioplasty. A second purpose is to evaluate the volume outcome hypothesis. This study included 100,318 angioplasties from 191 hospitals in 19 states; 43,966 (44%) involved stent placement. The major outcomes of interest were same admission hospital death and same admission CABG surgery. In comparison to patients with conventional angioplasty, patients receiving stents were younger, less often female and nonwhite, and had less diabetes and hypertension. In the group without infarction, hospital mortality was lower in the stent group (0.7% vs 0.9%, P = 0.01), as was the use of same admission bypass surgery (1.4% vs 2.7%, P < 0.0001). The same pattern was true for myocardial infarction; hospital mortality (2.7% vs 4.2%, P < 0.0001) and bypass surgery rates (1.6% vs 5.3%, P < 0.0001) were lower in the stent group. These results persisted after adjustment for important predictors of outcome. In general, outcomes were better in high volume centers, although in the stent group, there was no clear relationship between volume and outcome. These results support earlier findings that hospital mortality and particularly same admission surgery rates are lower with stenting. Although the volume outcome association for stenting was less clear in this study than in Medicare, these results do not mean that the fundamental volume outcome relationship has been changed by stenting. (J Interven Cardiol 2001;14:159–164)

Beginning in 1981, collaborative efforts developed between the University of Washington and community hospitals in Washington, British Columbia, Canada, and later outside the Pacific Northwest, have generated important findings about the treatment and outcome of acute myocardial infarction (AMI). These efforts, collectively known as the Western Washington and Myocardial Infarction Triage and Intervention Project trials, have included randomized trials of thrombolytic drugs, direct antithrombins, platelet receptors, antagonists, and cell adhesion blockers, as well as the formation of registries of consecutive patients admitted to coronary care units with the diagnosis of suspected AMI. Results of these trials have demonstrated that thrombolytic therapy significantly reduces mortality and morbidity from AMI with minimal risk to patients, and that early treatment is associated with improved infarct size and better left ventricular function. The efforts of the next decade should be focused on the further removal of barriers to rapid treatment and to the evaluation of new agents, so that the devastating effects of myocardial infarction are minimized to the fullest extent.