2020
Revascularization Practices and Outcomes in Patients With Multivessel Coronary Artery Disease Who Presented With Acute Myocardial Infarction and Cardiogenic Shock in the US, 2009-2018
Khera R, Secemsky EA, Wang Y, Desai NR, Krumholz HM, Maddox TM, Shunk KA, Virani SS, Bhatt DL, Curtis J, Yeh RW. Revascularization Practices and Outcomes in Patients With Multivessel Coronary Artery Disease Who Presented With Acute Myocardial Infarction and Cardiogenic Shock in the US, 2009-2018. JAMA Internal Medicine 2020, 180: 1317-1327. PMID: 32833024, PMCID: PMC9377424, DOI: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2020.3276.Peer-Reviewed Original ResearchMeSH KeywordsAdultAgedCohort StudiesCoronary VesselsFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHospital MortalityHumansMaleMiddle AgedMyocardial InfarctionPatient DischargePercutaneous Coronary InterventionRisk AssessmentRisk FactorsShock, CardiogenicST Elevation Myocardial InfarctionTime FactorsTreatment OutcomeUnited StatesConceptsST-segment elevation myocardial infarctionMultivessel percutaneous coronary interventionMultivessel coronary artery diseasePercutaneous coronary interventionAcute myocardial infarctionCoronary artery diseaseCulprit vessel percutaneous coronary interventionCardiogenic shockHospital mortalityArtery diseaseMyocardial infarctionCohort studyPrimary outcomeHospital variationPCI strategyMedicare beneficiariesUnderwent multivessel PCISignificant hospital variationElevation myocardial infarctionSubset of patientsHigh-risk populationRecent evidenceHospital complicationsPCI useRevascularization practiceContemporary Trends, Predictors and Outcomes of Perforation During Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (From the NCDR Cath PCI Registry)
Nairooz R, Parzynski CS, Curtis JP, Mohsen A, McNulty E, Uretsky BF, Hakeem A. Contemporary Trends, Predictors and Outcomes of Perforation During Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (From the NCDR Cath PCI Registry). The American Journal Of Cardiology 2020, 130: 37-45. PMID: 32665131, DOI: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2020.06.014.Peer-Reviewed Original ResearchConceptsPercutaneous coronary interventionCoronary artery perforationAdverse eventsCardiogenic shockStudy periodCoronary interventionChronic total occlusion (CTO) PCISaphenous vein graft percutaneous coronary interventionProportion of PCIsVein graft percutaneous coronary interventionNational Cardiovascular Data Registry CathPCI RegistryGraft percutaneous coronary interventionLargest real-world experienceCTO percutaneous coronary interventionComplex percutaneous coronary interventionMultivariable logistic regression modelNon-CP patientsOutcome of perforationTotal PCI volumeUse of atherectomyType C lesionsCoronary artery bypassHigh rateLife-threatening complicationsConcomitant significant increase
2018
Comparison of Physician Visual Assessment With Quantitative Coronary Angiography in Assessment of Stenosis Severity in China
Zhang H, Mu L, Hu S, Nallamothu BK, Lansky AJ, Xu B, Bouras G, Cohen DJ, Spertus JA, Masoudi FA, Curtis JP, Gao R, Ge J, Yang Y, Li J, Li X, Zheng X, Li Y, Krumholz HM, Jiang L. Comparison of Physician Visual Assessment With Quantitative Coronary Angiography in Assessment of Stenosis Severity in China. JAMA Internal Medicine 2018, 178: 239-247. PMID: 29340571, PMCID: PMC5838612, DOI: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2017.7821.Peer-Reviewed Original ResearchMeSH KeywordsAgedAged, 80 and overChinaCoronary AngiographyCoronary StenosisCoronary VesselsCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansIncidenceMaleMiddle AgedPercutaneous Coronary InterventionPractice Patterns, Physicians'Predictive Value of TestsProspective StudiesRisk AssessmentSeverity of Illness IndexTime FactorsConceptsPhysician visual assessmentPercutaneous coronary interventionAcute myocardial infarctionQuantitative coronary angiographyStenosis severityCoronary angiographyMean agePCI studiesMean percent diameter stenosisIndependent core laboratoryPercent diameter stenosisCross-sectional studyNon-AMI patientsStandard clinical practiceFractional flow reserveSubset of participantsQCA assessmentCoronary revascularizationMore stenosisCoronary interventionCoronary lesionsChina PatientCoronary angiogramDiameter stenosisMyocardial infarction
2017
Coronary Venous Dissection from Left Ventricular Lead Placement During Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy With Defibrillator Implantation and Associated in-Hospital Adverse Events (from the NCDR ICD Registry)
Hsu JC, Varosy PD, Bao H, Dewland TA, Curtis JP, Marcus GM. Coronary Venous Dissection from Left Ventricular Lead Placement During Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy With Defibrillator Implantation and Associated in-Hospital Adverse Events (from the NCDR ICD Registry). The American Journal Of Cardiology 2017, 121: 55-61. PMID: 29102348, DOI: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2017.09.019.Peer-Reviewed Original ResearchConceptsCRT-D recipientsVentricular lead placementHospital adverse eventsVenous dissectionMultivariable adjustmentAdverse eventsMajor complicationsLead placementGreater oddsPrevious coronary artery bypass graftImplantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator RegistryLeft ventricular lead placementCoronary artery bypass graftHierarchical multivariable logistic regressionHospital clinical outcomesArtery bypass graftCardiac resynchronization therapyMultivariable logistic regressionBundle branch blockHospital complicationsHospital mortalityHospital deathHospital stayDefibrillator implantationProlonged hospitalization