http://repub.eur.nl/res/aut/7280/ List of Publications en http://repub.eur.nl/static-eur/img/logo.png http://repub.eur.nl http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/34442/ 2011-11-01T00:00:00Z Objectives: The present analysis was performed to evaluate the impact of diabetes mellitus (DM) status on the severity of coronary artery disease (CAD) and current approaches in interventional treatment. Background: Little is known about the effect of DM treated with diet, oral agents, or insulin on lesion characteristics and anatomical pattern of CAD and their interventional treatment. Methods and results: Patients (n = 46,779) of the contemporary Euro Heart Survey PCI registry with known DM status were included in this analysis. Nondiabetics (n = 35,280, 75.4%) were compared with diabetics treated with diet (n = 1,533, 3.3%), oral agents (n = 7,222, 15.4%), and insulin (n = 2,744, 5.8%). Diabetic patients were older, suffered more frequently from comorbidities and presented more often with cardiogenic shock. The number of severely stenosed (≥70%) segments incrementally increased from nondiabetics to insulin-requiring diabetics. The location of lesions did not differ between patients with and without DM. The ratio stenosed/treated segments progressively rose among the four patient cohorts. The severity of DM negatively correlated with the extent of complete revascularization. After adjustment for confounding variables no significant differences in hospital mortality could be observed between patients without DM and diabetics treated with diet, but a significantly higher rate of death was seen in diabetic patients with oral medication and insulin therapy. Conclusions: Although CAD was more severe in patients with DM the percentage of treated segments with ≥70% stenosis was lower. Adjusted hospital mortality was increased among diabetics treated with oral medication or insulin, but not among those treated with diet. Copyright http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/33634/ 2011-09-01T00:00:00Z Background: The percentage of elderly treated with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) has been increasing year by year. Little is known about predictors of hospital mortality in elderly undergoing PCI for acute coronary syndromes (ACS) and stable angina. Methods: Between 2005 and 2008 a total of 47,407 consecutive patients undergoing PCI were prospectively enrolled into the PCI-Registry of the EHS Programme. For the present analysis patients were divided into four categories: ACS patients ≥ 75 (n = 4,943) and < 75 years (n = 19,446), and patients with stable angina ≥ 75 (n = 3,393) and < 75 years (n = 19,625). A multiple logistic regression analysis was conducted to detect independent predictors of mortality in patients ≥ 75 years undergoing PCI. In addition, differences in clinical characteristics, procedural details and in-hospital outcomes between the subgroups were evaluated. Results: Patients ≥ 75 years had more co-morbidities, and more severe coronary pathology. The use of guideline-recommended adjunctive therapy and procedural success was high in all groups. The incidence of in-hospital death was highest in ACS patients ≥ 75 years (5.2%) and < 75 years (1.7%), followed by patients with stable angina ≥ 75 (0.5%) and < 75 years (0.2%). Haemodynamic instability and acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction were the strongest determinants of hospital mortality among patients ≥ 75 years with ACS, whereas interventional complications were the most meaningful predictors of death in older patients undergoing elective PCI. Conclusions: Patients ≥ 75 years undergoing PCI face a relatively low risk of hospital death. However, complication rates were significantly higher compared to younger patients, strongly influenced by clinical, angiographic and interventional variables. http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/33675/ 2011-06-01T00:00:00Z AimsThe applicability of currently available risk prediction models for patients undergoing percutaneous coronary interventions (PCIs) is limited. We aimed to develop a model for the prediction of in-hospital mortality after PCI that is based on contemporary and representative data from a European perspective. Methods and resultsOur analyses are based on the Euro Heart Survey of PCIs, which contains information on 46 064 consecutive patients who underwent PCI for different indications in 176 participating European centres during 200508. Patients were randomly divided into a training (n = 23 032) and a validation (n = 23 032) set with similar characteristics. In these sets, 339 (1.5) and 305 (1.3) patients died during hospitalization, respectively. On the basis of the training set, a logistic model was constructed that related 16 independent patient or lesion characteristics with mortality, including PCI indication, advanced age, haemodynamic instability, multivessel disease, and proximal LAD disease. In both the training and validation data sets, the model had a good performance in terms of discrimination (C-index 0.91 and 0.90, respectively) and calibration (HosmerLemeshow P-value 0.39 and 0.18, respectively). Conclusion In-hospital mortality in PCI patients was well predicted by a risk score that contains 16 factors. The score has strong applicability for European practices. http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/19851/ 2010-06-01T00:00:00Z Background: The most recent ESC guidelines for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) recommend the use of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors (GPI) in high risk patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes (NSTE-ACS), particularly in diabetics. Little is known about the adherence to these guidelines within Europe. Methods and results: Between May 2005 and April 2008 a total of 47,407 consecutive patients undergoing PCI were prospectively enrolled into the PCI-Registry of the Euro Heart Survey Programme. In the present analysis we examined the use of GPI in 2,922 diabetics who underwent PCI for NSTE-ACS. In this high risk population only 22.2% received a GPI; 8.9% upstream and 13.4% during PCI. The strategy of the individual institution had a major impact on the usage of GPI. In the multiple regression analysis clinical instability and complex lesion characteristics were strong independent determinants for the use of GPI, whereas renal insufficiency was negatively associated with its use. After adjustment for confounding variables no significant differences in hospital mortality could be observed between the cohorts, but a significantly higher rate of non-fatal postprocedural myocardial infarction was observed among patients receiving GPI upstream. Conclusions: Despite the recommendation for its use in the current ESC guidelines, only a minority of the diabetics in Europe undergoing PCI for NSTE-ACS received a GPI. The use of GPI was mainly triggered by high-risk interventional scenarios. http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/27090/ 2009-01-01T00:00:00Z http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/36157/ 2007-12-18T00:00:00Z http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/13603/ 2005-02-01T00:00:00Z AIMS: Systematic registration of data from clinical practice is important for clinical care, local, national and international registries, and audit. Data to be collected for these different purposes should be harmonized. Therefore, during Ireland's Presidency of the European Union (EU) (January to June 2004), the Department of Health and Children worked with the European Society of Cardiology, the Irish Cardiac Society, and the European Commission to develop data standards for clinical cardiology. The Cardiology Audit and Registration Data Standards (CARDS) Project aimed to agree standards for three modules of cardiovascular health information systems: acute coronary syndromes (ACS), percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI), and clinical electrophysiology (pacemakers, implantable cardioverter defibrillators, and ablation procedures). METHODS AND RESULTS: Data items from existing registries and surveys were reviewed to derive draft data standards (variables, coding, and definitions). Variables common to the three modules include demographics, risk factors, medication, and discharge and follow-up data. Modules about a procedure contain variables on the lesion, the device, and medication during the procedure. The ACS module includes presenting symptoms, reperfusion and acute treatments, and procedures in hospital and at follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: The data standards were discussed and adopted at a conference involving EU member states in Cork, Ireland, in May 2004. After a pilot study, the standards will be disseminated to stakeholders throughout Europe. http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/9938/ 2002-08-01T00:00:00Z AIMS: To better delineate the characteristics, treatments, and outcomes of patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) in representative countries across Europe and the Mediterranean basin, and to examine adherence to current guidelines. METHODS AND RESULTS: We performed a prospective survey (103 hospitals, 25 countries) of 10484 patients with a discharge diagnosis of acute coronary syndromes. The initial diagnosis was ST elevation ACS in 42.3%, non-ST elevation ACS in 51.2%, and undetermined electrocardiogram ACS in 6.5%. The discharge diagnosis was Q wave myocardial infarction in 32.8%, non-Q wave myocardial infarction in 25.3%, and unstable angina in 41.9%. The use of aspirin, beta-blockers, angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors, and heparins for patients with ST elevation ACS were 93.0%, 77.8%, 62.1%, and 86.8%, respectively, with corresponding rates of 88.5%, 76.6%, 55.8%, and 83.9% for non-ST elevation ACS patients. Coronary angiography, percutaneous coronary interventions, and coronary bypass surgery were performed in 56.3%, 40.4%, and 3.4% of ST elevation ACS patients, respectively, with corresponding rates of 52.0%, 25.4%, and 5.4% for non-ST elevation ACS patients. Among patients with ST elevation ACS, 55.8% received reperfusion treatment; 35.1% fibrinolytic therapy and 20.7% primary percutaneous coronary interventions. The in-hospital mortality of patients with ST elevation ACS was 7.0%, for non-ST elevation ACS 2.4%, and for undetermined electrocardiogram ACS 11.8%. At 30 days, mortality was 8.4%, 3.5%, and 13.3%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: This survey demonstrates the discordance between existing guidelines for ACS and current practice across a broad region in Europe and the Mediterranean basin and more extensively reflects the outcomes of ACS in real practice in this region