HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Personal Folders Download to citation manager Permission Requests Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Carey, J. S. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Carey, J. S. Related Collections Coronary disease Related Article

J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2005;129:1276-1282
© 2005 The American Association for Thoracic Surgery

Surgery for Acquired Cardiovascular Disease

Procedure rates and outcomes of coronary revascularization procedures in California and New York

^a California Society of Thoracic Surgeons, Torrance, Calif
^b Health Information Solutions, Rocklin, Calif
^c Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, NY

Read at the Thirtieth Annual Meeting of The Western Thoracic Surgical Association, Maui, Hawaii, June 23–26, 2004.

Received for publication June 23, 2004; revisions received December 1, 2004; accepted for publication December 17, 2004.

^_* Address for reprints: Joseph S. Carey, MD, 3475 Torrance Blvd, Suite B-1, Torrance, CA 90503 (Email: careyjs{at}earthlink.net).

OBJECTIVE: Background data were obtained on all California hospitals performing coronary artery bypass grafting and percutaneous coronary intervention procedures and compared with reports published by the state of New York to develop a collaborative quality improvement program for cardiac surgery programs.

METHODS: The Patient Discharge Database of the Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development was queried for the years 1999–2001. In-hospital mortality and risk factors for coronary artery bypass grafting and percutaneous coronary intervention were obtained by using demographic data and International Classification of Diseases-Ninth Revision-Clinical Modification procedure and diagnosis codes. Risk models were developed by means of logistic regression analysis.

RESULTS: Overall coronary artery bypass grafting mortality was 33% higher and percutaneous coronary intervention mortality was twice as high in California compared with that in New York. Procedural volume (per unit population) was higher in New York. In high-volume California hospitals (>300 procedures per year), coronary artery bypass grafting mortality was similar (California, 2.42%; New York, 2.25%). Excess coronary artery bypass grafting mortality (>4.0%) occurred only in low-volume programs. Risk adjustment did not change the volume effect for coronary artery bypass grafting. No volume effect was noted for risk-adjusted percutaneous coronary intervention mortality. There were no obvious differences in risk factors between California and New York. Programs performing relatively fewer coronary artery bypass grafting procedures compared with percutaneous coronary interventions were found to have significantly higher coronary artery bypass grafting mortality after adjusting for volume effects. Percutaneous coronary intervention volume is increasing and coronary artery bypass grafting volume is decreasing in both California and New York.

CONCLUSIONS: Excess coronary artery bypass grafting mortality in California is related to the large number of low-volume programs. Excess percutaneous coronary intervention mortality might be related to case selection or timing of intervention. A relationship between percutaneous coronary intervention volume and coronary artery bypass grafting mortality is suggested in which increasing percutaneous coronary intervention volume relative to coronary artery bypass grafting volume might have the effect of shifting patients with undefined higher risk characteristics to coronary artery bypass grafting.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				J. S. Carey, J. P. Parker, C. Brandeau, and Z. Li The "occasional open heart surgeon" revisited. J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg., June 1, 2008; 135(6): 1254 - 1260. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				R. Ricciardi, B. A. Virnig, J. W. Ogilvie Jr, P. S. Dahlberg, H. P. Selker, and N. N. Baxter Volume-Outcome Relationship for Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting in an Era of Decreasing Volume Arch Surg, April 1, 2008; 143(4): 338 - 344. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				S. H Wong, S. Wan, and M. J Underwood Myocardial Revascularization: Surgery or Stenting? Asian Cardiovasc Thorac Ann, June 1, 2007; 15(3): 264 - 269. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				K R Burton, R Slack, K G Oldroyd, A C H Pell, A D Flapan, I R Starkey, H Eteiba, K P Jennings, R J Northcote, W S. Hillis, et al. Hospital volume of throughput and periprocedural and medium-term adverse events after percutaneous coronary intervention: retrospective cohort study of all 17 417 procedures undertaken in Scotland, 1997-2003 Heart, November 1, 2006; 92(11): 1667 - 1672. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				G. Gao, Y. Wu, G. L. Grunkemeier, A. P. Furnary, and A. Starr Long-term survival of patients after coronary artery bypass graft surgery: comparison of the pre-stent and post-stent eras. Ann. Thorac. Surg., September 1, 2006; 82(3): 806 - 810. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				R. H. Jones The Year in Cardiovascular Surgery J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., May 16, 2006; 47(10): 2094 - 2107. [Full Text] [PDF]

				D. F. Torchiana and G. S. Meyer Use of administrative data for clinical quality measurement J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg., June 1, 2005; 129(6): 1223 - 1225. [Full Text] [PDF]