Abstract
Background Primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for acute myocardial infarction (AMI) is performed in hospitals without on-site coronary artery bypass graft surgery in the `real world'. However, data on the in-hospital outcomes of primary PCI performed at hospitals with and without on-site cardiac surgery are still lacking in Japan. Methods and Results In the present study, 2,230 AMI patients were enrolled in the AMI-Kyoto Multi-Center Risk Study between January 2000 and December 2005. Of these, 1,817 patients underwent primary PCI. Excluding patients without adequate data, we retrospectively compared clinical background, coronary risk factors, angiographic findings, acute results of primary PCI and in-hospital prognosis between patients undergoing primary PCI in hospitals without on-site cardiac surgery (without surgery group, n=792) and those in hospitals with (with surgery group, n=993). The without surgery group had higher prevalence of previous myocardial infarction, Killip class ≥3 at admission and multivessels as a culprit lesion than the with surgery group. The without surgery group was more likely to have lower frequency of stent usage and lower thrombolysis in myocardial infarction flow grade just after PCI, whereas it was more likely to have intra-aortic balloon pumping and temporary pacing during procedures. The overall in-hospital mortality did not differ between the 2 groups. On multivariate analysis, in AMI patients undergoing primary PCI, Killip class ≥3 at admission, multivessels or left main trunk (LMT) as culprit lesions, number of diseased vessels ≥2 or diseased LMT, and age were the independent predictors of the in-hospital mortality, but the presence of on-site cardiac surgery was not. Conclusions These results suggest that in-hospital outcomes in AMI patients undergoing primary PCI at hospitals without on-site cardiac surgery are comparable to those at hospitals with on-site cardiac surgery in Japan. (Circ J 2007; 71: 1208 - 1212)
