Search

Over the last 20 years the epidemiology of acute coronary syndromes (ACS) has significantly changed, affecting both the acute and post-acute phases. In particular, although the progressive reduction in in-hospital mortality, the trend in post-hospital mortality was found to be stable or increasing. This trend was at least in part attributed to the improved short-term prognosis due to coronary interventions in the acute phase, which ultimately have increased the population of survivors at high risk of relapse. Thus, while hospital management of ACS has shown great progress in terms of diagnostic and therapeutic efficacy, post-hospital care has not had a parallel development. This is certainly partly attributable to the inadequacy of post-discharge cardiologic facilities, so far not planned according to the level of risk of individual patients. Hence, it is crucial that patients at high risk of relapse are identified and initiated into more intensive secondary prevention strategies. On the basis of epidemiological data, the cornerstones of post-ACS prognostic stratification are represented on the one hand by the identification of heart failure (HF) at index hospitalization, on the other hand by the assessment of residual ischemic risk. In patients presenting with HF at index hospitalization, the fatal rehospitalization rate increases by 0.90% per year from 2001 to 2011, with a mortality between discharge and the first year which in 2011 was equal to 10%. The risk of fatal readmission at 1 year is therefore strongly conditioned by the presence of HF which, together with age, is the major predictor of new events. The effect of high residual ischemic risk on subsequent mortality shows increasing trend up to the second year of follow-up, moderately increasing over the years until reaching a plateau around the fifth year. These observations confirm the need for long-term secondary prevention programs and implementation of a continuous surveillance in selected patients.

The allocation of clinical and economic resources is an emerging issue in health management. A useful update necessarily depends on the evaluation of long-term outcomes of clinical and surgical resources that can permit emphasis on all amendable fields, improve quality of care, and reduce health costs. The PRIORITY (PRedictIng long term Outcomes afteR Isolated coronary arTery bypass surgerY) study represents the first innovative step toward the updating of health management in a selected field, surgery for coronary artery disease, which is one of the most prevalent diseases and requires allocation of high-cost resources, although information on long-term outcomes is limited. The aims of the PRIORITY study are the identification of preoperative risk factors for long-term outcomes and the development of clinical and administrative preoperative scores that can guide clinicians and the national health system to more appropriate actions for increasing quality of care and reducing costs.

Background: The OBSERVANT study evaluated the medium and long-term outcomes in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) versus surgical aortic valve replacement obtaining comparative effectiveness results at least for the first-generation devices. The OBSERVANT II study enrolled a new series of TAVI procedures to evaluate whether the use of new-generation devices has modified outcome differences recorded in the OBSERVANT study. The aim of this paper is to describe the clinical characteristics of the OBSERVANT II population and compare them with those of the OBSERVANT population., Methods: OBSERVANT II is a prospective multicenter observational study, which enrolled patients with severe aortic stenosis, who underwent a TAVI procedure in 30 Italian centers from December 2016 to September 2018. Clinical, anatomical and procedural information was recorded for each patient as well as procedure characteristics and any periprocedural outcomes. An administrative follow-up will allow to obtain information on medium and long-term outcomes., Results: The enrolled population consists of 3001 patients with a mean age similar to that recorded in OBSERVANT (81.7 ± 6.3 vs 81.9 ± 6.2 years; p=0.336). OBSERVANT II patients show a lower prevalence of several morbid conditions than OBSERVANT patients (i.e. chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, coronary artery disease, peripheral arterial disease, etc.), though having very similar mean values of EuroSCORE II (7.2 ± 7.6% vs 7.4 ± 7.9%; p=0.558). According to three EuroSCORE II risk classes (≤3; 3-7; ≥7), the in-hospital mortality rates for patients enrolled in the two studies are 1.0% vs 2.0% (p≤0.000), 1.4% vs 4.1% (p<0.000) and 2.4% vs 7.7% (p<0.000), respectively., Conclusions: The first results of the OBSERVANT II study show that patients undergoing TAVI with new-generation devices are elderly, have a lower risk profile than patients enrolled in the OBSERVANT study but comparable mean values of EuroSCORE II. The in-hospital mortality rate for patients enrolled in the OBSERVANT II study is lower than that recorded in the OBSERVANT study across all the EuroSCORE II risk classes.

Background: The rapid spread of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) for the treatment of severe symptomatic aortic stenosis in the last decade in Italy has led to a gradually increasing use of TAVI procedures also in patients potentially eligible for aortic valve replacement (AVR). For this subset of patients, the OBSERVANT study (2011-2012) evaluated the short- and medium term outcome of TAVI vs AVR, at least for the first generations of TAVI devices, but failed to gather information on all the technological innovations occurred in recent years. The launch of a phase II of the study will allow to recruit a new series of TAVI, with different risk profiles compared with the historical OBSERVANT TAVI cohort, in order to assess whether and how much the use of new-generation devices mitigate the differences in outcomes recorded in the OBSERVANT study., Methods: OBSERVANT II is an observational multicenter, prospective, cohort study collecting data on patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis undergoing TAVI in Italian hospitals since December 15, 2016, for at least 12 months. For each patient, data on demographic characteristics, health status, type of intervention and presence of comorbidities will be collected. Mortality and incidence of in-hospital major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) within 36 months of intervention will be the primary adverse outcome. Secondary outcomes will include 30-day mortality and the incidence of MACCE at 12 and 24 months. The statistical hypotheses were formulated considering the results from the OBSERVANT study. Testing these hypotheses will require the recruitment of at least 823 new TAVI. The risk/propensity-adjustment techniques will be used to comparatively evaluate the effectiveness of TAVI vs AVR., Expected Results: Safety and efficacy profiles of the new-generation TAVI prosthesis; comparative effectiveness of the new TAVI prosthesis as compared to TAVI procedures of the OBSERVANT historical cohort; comparative effectiveness of the new TAVI prosthesis as compared to AVR procedures of the OBSERVANT historical cohort., Conclusions: The results of OBSERVANT II will provide information on the effectiveness of TAVI employing new-generation devices and will be a valuable support to give professionals and policy makers evidence-based results useful for decision-making processes.

Background: OBSERVANT represents the first national observational study on the comparative effectiveness of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) vs surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) at short, medium and long term, in a patient population with severe aortic stenosis (AS). The aim of this paper is to describe patient characteristics and short-term outcomes of the enrolled population., Methods: OBSERVANT is an observational prospective multicenter cohort study that enrolled AS patients undergoing SAVR or TAVI from December 2010 to June 2012 in the participating hospitals. Information on demographic characteristics, health status prior to intervention, therapeutic approach, intraprocedural and 30-day outcomes was collected. An administrative follow-up was set up to collect data on long-term outcomes., Results: The enrolled population included 7618 patients undergoing transfemoral/transubclavian TAVI (TF/TS-TAVI, n=1652), transapical TAVI (TA-TAVI, n=259) or SAVR (n=5707). SAVR patients were younger and with a lower risk profile than TAVI patients (logistic EuroSCORE: SAVR 6.4 ± 7.3%, TF/TS-TAVI 14.1 ± 12.1%, TA-TAVI 15.5 ± 11.0%; p<0.001). When 30-day mortality rates were stratified by logistic EuroSCORE, a statistically significant difference was found only in the patient subgroup with logistic EuroSCORE ≤5% (SAVR 1.0%, TF/TS-TAVI 4.7%, TA-TAVI 0.0%; p=0.005)., Conclusions: Findings from the OBSERVANT study confirm that patients undergoing TAVI are older and sicker than patients undergoing SAVR. Nevertheless, the logistic EuroSCORE shows that, in Italy, also patients at intermediate surgical risk are treated with TAVI. Stratifying by logistic EuroSCORE, SAVR seems to be superior to TAVI in the subgroup of patients at very low risk. More sophisticated analyses on patient subgroups with comparable risk profile and on long-term follow-up will allow to obtain valuable information on the effectiveness of TAVI and SAVR procedures.

Background: Although the improvement of therapeutic strategies is leading to a dramatic decline of in-hospital acute coronary syndrome (ACS) death rates, differences in care and prognosis of ACS patients exist when age, gender and admission department are considered., Methods: The national hospital informative system was used. Only data recorded in three Italian Regions from December 1, 2005 to November 30, 2007 were analyzed. This approach allowed to identify 70 413 patients reporting ACS as primary or secondary diagnosis. The ACS cohort was stratified by age (≤64, 65-74 and ≥75 years) and gender. ACS events were divided into two groups: 42 503 patients with non-ST-elevation ACS (NSTE-ACS) and 27 910 patients with ST-elevation ACS (STEMI). The proportion of NSTE-ACS and STEMI patients treated in general medicine or cardiology departments requiring a coronary procedure or extensive investigations, and in-hospital 30-day mortality rates adjusted by age and gender were analyzed., Results: 19% of STEMI and 15% of NSTE-ACS patients are admitted to a general medicine department. For STEMI patients, the proportion increases up to 37.6% when females aged ≥75 years are considered. Patients undergo a coronary procedure or extensive investigations less commonly in general medicine than in cardiology departments; in-hospital 30-day adjusted mortality rates in general medicine departments are approximately 2-fold higher than those recorded in cardiology departments (STEMI: 26.4 vs 16.7%; NSTE-ACS: 7.7 vs 4.2%)., Conclusions: In-hospital mortality rates of ACS patients admitted to cardiology departments are lower than those reported in general medicine departments. Nevertheless, in-hospital management of women and elderly ACS patients does not completely comply with the recommended guidelines and exposes them to unfavorable prognosis.

Observational outcome studies represent a valid approach to evaluating comparative treatment effectiveness in real populations. The main objective of outcome research is to underline what works and what does not work in the field of health assistance. In 2004 the Italian Ministry of Health launched the Project "Mattone Misura dell'Outcome" aimed at assessing the introduction of procedures and methods for the systematic evaluation of outcomes in the national health system. A new experience, the PROGRESSI program (PROGRamma ESiti per SIVeAS e LEA), started in 2008 with the aim to further develop the methodologies for outcome evaluation. In this Supplement the final results from four clinical studies named "Sperimentazioni dell'area cardiovascolare del Progetto Mattoni" are presented. These studies started between 2005 and 2007 and their main objectives were to evaluate: --the contribution of information from current informative systems and clinical studies in risk-adjustment methodologies; --the advisability of introducing some clinical items in current informative systems to improve outcome estimates; --the goodness of follow-up procedures from current informative systems; and --the role of disease registries in the validation of comparative evaluation measures. The four studies were designed as voluntary prospective multicentre studies. Results concerning the characteristics of the enrolled populations as well as the risk-adjustment models built using information from current informative systems and/or clinical information are presented. As expected, each study produced specific remarks both in terms of clinical findings and contribution of different informative systems to the risk-adjustment models. In general, models built with information from both current informative systems and clinical information show the best performance. Findings from these analyses will provide the public health system with suitable indications to improve statistical methodologies for outcome estimates.

Background: In early 2008, a new national prospective study on short-term outcomes of coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) procedures started in Italy. The aim was to describe short-term results in patients undergoing CABG and improve methodologies for comparative outcome evaluation., Methods: Only 26 Italian cardiac surgery centers participated in this survey. For each patient undergoing a CABG procedure, all centers were requested to provide specific data (type of procedure, hemodynamic conditions, comorbidities, recent myocardial infarction and unstable angina, ventricular function, emergency conditions, vital status at 30 days). Representativeness was tested by comparing characteristics of the enrolled population with information derived from national hospital discharge records. A multiple logistic regression analysis was used to perform indirect standardization; the mortality rate of the whole population was used as a reference standard. Comparison with the CABG model built on 34 310 patients in 2002-2004 was performed as well., Results: The analysis of 7436 isolated CABG procedures showed a 30-day mortality of approximately 2%. The study population seemed to be representative of the Italian population of CABG patients. Using the new estimate model, two cardiac surgery centers showed significantly better risk adjusted mortality rates than the national reference standard, and two others showed significantly worse rates. The application of the "CABG model" yielded similar results., Conclusions: Our study shows a high-quality level of Italian cardiac surgery centers and confirms the good applicability of the CABG model to the Italian CABG population. Comparison between results from the two models highlights the usefulness of regular outcome studies either for updating risk adjustment procedures and monitoring quality of care in Italian hospitals.

Current guidelines state that cardiac rehabilitation is indicated after the acute phase of major cardiovascular diseases and interventions; on the other hand implementation of these indications is difficult because of several barriers, i.e. the number of patients per year with an indication exceeds by far the accommodation offer of cardiac rehabilitation centers; the demand for access to cardiac rehabilitation from acute cardiac care hospitals is low because the attention is focused on the acute phase of cardiac diseases. The present Consensus Document describes the changes in clinical epidemiology of the main cardiovascular diseases, showing that complications are increasingly more frequent in the post-acute phase, especially in the setting of myocardial infarction. The Joint ANMCO/IACPR-GICR Committee defines priority criteria based on clinical risk for admission to cardiac rehabilitation centers as inpatients. This Consensus Document represents, therefore, an important step forward in the search for continuity of care in high-risk patients during the post-acute phase.

Rationale: Severe symptomatic aortic stenosis (SSAS) is the most common acquired valvular heart disease in the western world, and its prevalence is strongly linked to the phenomenon of population ageing. After symptom onset, patients with SSAS, if untreated, show very poor prognoses, unavoidably reaching complete disability status with a significant reduction in survival. Although aortic valve replacement (AVR) is the definitive therapy for this kind of patients, a new, less-invasive alternative like transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has been considered, at least for a large proportion of patients with very high or prohibitive operative risks. OBSERVANT represents the first observational multicenter perspective study on the comparative effectiveness of TAVI, AVR, and medical therapy in the Italian population with SSAS., Materials and Methods: In the participating hospitals, to define the patient risk profile for each patient with SSAS, data on demographic characteristics, health status prior to intervention and presence of comorbidities will be collected. Moreover, complete information on the type of intervention will be gathered. Mortality within 30 days from intervention is the primary adverse outcome. Secondary outcomes include mortality within 12 and 24 months and the incidence of in-hospital major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events. Clinical monitoring procedures will allow assessment of the reliability and completeness of the database and help maintain constant quality control. To compare the effectiveness of AVR, TAVI, and medical treatment in terms of medium- and long-term outcomes, accounting for possible differences in patient case-mix among the three treatment groups, risk adjustment techniques will be applied., Expected Results: Short-, medium-, and long-term outcome in patients undergoing one of the three SSAS treatments; use, appropriateness, and economic and organizational impact of TAVI and AVR procedures; specific "indication criteria" to guarantee appropriate patient selection for AVR or TAVI; new pre-procedure risk score, specific for the elderly Italian population; guidelines on TAVI procedure coding and a system of administrative follow-up to be proposed to the regional health systems for managing the use of the AVR or TAVI procedures., Conclusions: The complete knowledge base derived from this study will be directly transferable to professionals and policy makers, giving them evidence-based results for use in their decision-making process.

Background: The availability of two contemporary sources of information about coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) interventions, allowed 1) to verify the feasibility of performing outcome evaluation studies using administrative data sources, and 2) to compare hospital performance obtainable using the CABG Project clinical database with hospital performance derived from the use of current administrative data., Methods: Interventions recorded in the CABG Project were linked to the hospital discharge record (HDR) administrative database. Only the linked records were considered for subsequent analyses (46% of the total CABG Project). A new selected population "clinical card-HDR" was then defined. Two independent risk-adjustment models were applied, each of them using information derived from one of the two different sources. Then, HDR information was supplemented with some patient preoperative conditions from the CABG clinical database. The two models were compared in terms of their adaptability to data. Hospital performances identified by the two different models and significantly different from the mean was compared., Results: In only 4 of the 13 hospitals considered for analysis, the results obtained using the HDR model did not completely overlap with those obtained by the CABG model. When comparing statistical parameters of the HDR model and the HDR model + patient preoperative conditions, the latter showed the best adaptability to data., Conclusions: In this "clinical card-HDR" population, hospital performance assessment obtained using information from the clinical database is similar to that derived from the use of current administrative data. However, when risk-adjustment models built on administrative databases are supplemented with a few clinical variables, their statistical parameters improve and hospital performance assessment becomes more accurate.