Journal Mobile Options
Table of Contents
Vol. 103, No. 3, 2005
Issue release date: April 2005
Cardiology 2005;103:143–147

Variation in Outcomes after Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in the United States and Predictors of Periprocedural Mortality

Mukherjee D. · Wainess R.M. · Dimick J.B. · Cowan J.A. · Rajagopalan S. · Chetcuti S. · Grossman P.M. · Upchurch G.R.
aUniversity of Michigan Cardiovascular Center and bDepartment of Surgery, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Mich., USA

Individual Users: Register with Karger Login Information

Please create your User ID & Password

Contact Information

I have read the Karger Terms and Conditions and agree.

To view the fulltext, please log in

To view the pdf, please log in


The objective of this study was to characterize variation in mortality rates across hospitals performing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in the United States. For this purpose, data (n = 735,022) from the Nationwide Inpatient Sample from 1996 to 2001 were analyzed. The primary outcome for the analysis was postprocedural in-hospital mortality. Mortality rates were calculated by race, gender, geographic region, comorbid status and hospital volume. There were significant variations in mortality across gender groups, comorbid status, regions and by hospital volume status. Independent predictors of mortality in this large cohort were older age, female gender, lower income and lower hospital volume. The data suggests targets for quality improvement initiatives for patients undergoing PCI particularly in the elderly, females, lower income patients and low volume hospitals. Even in the contemporary era of adjunctive pharmacological therapies and ubiquitous use of stents, hospital volume remains a significant independent predictor of in-hospital mortality.

Copyright / Drug Dosage

Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher or, in the case of photocopying, direct payment of a specified fee to the Copyright Clearance Center.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in goverment regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.


  1. American Heart Association: Heart Disease and Stroke Statistics – 2004 Update. Dallas, American Heart Association, 2004.
  2. Steiner C, Elixhauser A, Schnaier J: The healthcare cost and utilization project: An overview. Eff Clin Pract 2002;5:143–151.

    External Resources

  3. Best AE: Secondary data bases and their use in outcomes research: A review of the area resource file and the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project. J Med Syst 1999;23:175–181.
  4. Hannan EL, Racz M, Ryan TJ, McCallister BD, Johnson LW, Arani DT, Guerci AD, Sosa J, Topol EJ: Coronary angioplasty volume-outcome relationships for hospitals and cardiologists. JAMA 1997;277:892–898.
  5. Epstein AJ, Rathore SS, Volpp KG, Krumholz HM: Hospital percutaneous coronary intervention volume and patient mortality, 1998 to 2000: Does the evidence support current procedure volume minimums? J Am Coll Cardiol 2004;43:1755–1762.
  6. Romano PS, Roos LL, Jollis JG: Adapting a clinical comorbidity index for use with ICD-9-CM administrative data: Differing perspectives. J Clin Epidemiol 1993;46:1075–1079.
  7. Charlson ME, Pompei P, Ales KL, MacKenzie CR: A new method of classifying prognostic comorbidity in longitudinal studies: Development and validation. J Chronic Dis 1987;40:373–383.
  8. Deyo RA, Cherkin DC, Ciol MA: Adapting a clinical comorbidity index for use with ICD-9-CM administrative databases. J Clin Epidemiol 1992;45:613–619.
  9. Dimick JB, Pronovost PJ, Cowan JA Jr, Lipsett PA, Stanley JC, Upchurch GR Jr: Variation in postoperative complication rates after high-risk surgery in the United States. Surgery 2003;134:534–540.
  10. Milstein A, Galvin RS, Delbanco SF, Salber P, Buck CR Jr: Improving the safety of health care: The leapfrog initiative. Eff Clin Pract 2000;3:313–316.
  11. Smith SC Jr, Dove JT, Jacobs AK, Kennedy JW, Kereiakes D, Kern MJ, Kuntz RE, Popma JJ, Schaff HV, Williams DO, Gibbons RJ, Alpert JP, Eagle KA, Faxon DP, Fuster V, Gardner TJ, Gregoratos G, Russell RO: ACC/AHA guidelines of percutaneous coronary interventions. J Am Coll Cardiol 2001;37:2215–2239.
  12. Dudley RA, Johansen KL, Brand R, Rennie DJ, Milstein A: Selective referral to high-volume hospitals: Estimating potentially avoidable deaths. JAMA 2000;283:1159–1166.
  13. Birkmeyer JD, Finlayson EV, Birkmeyer CM: Volume standards for high-risk surgical procedures: Potential benefits of the Leapfrog initiative. Surgery 2001;130:415–422.
  14. Birkmeyer JD, Dimick JB: Potential benefits of the new Leapfrog standards: Effect of process and outcomes measures. Surgery 2004;135:569–575.
  15. Birkmeyer JD, Dimick JB, Birkmeyer NJ: Measuring the quality of surgical care: Structure, process, or outcomes? J Am Coll Surg 2004;198:626–632.
  16. Birkmeyer JD, Stukel TA, Siewers AE, Goodney PP, Wennberg DE, Lucas FL: Surgeon volume and operative mortality in the United States. N Engl J Med 2003;349:2117–2127.
  17. Weingart SN, Iezzoni LI, Davis RB, Palmer RH, Cahalane M, Hamel MB, Mukamal K, Phillips RS, Davies DT Jr, Banks NJ: Use of administrative data to find substandard care: Validation of the complications screening program. Med Care 2000;38:796–806.
  18. Lawthers AG, McCarthy EP, Davis RB, Peterson LE, Palmer RH, Iezzoni LI: Identification of in-hospital complications from claims data. Is it valid? Med Care 2000;38:785–795.

Pay-per-View Options
Direct payment This item at the regular price: USD 38.00
Payment from account With a Karger Pay-per-View account (down payment USD 150) you profit from a special rate for this and other single items.
This item at the discounted price: USD 26.50