Angioplastica coronarica (con PTCA): interventi chirurgici eseguiti in un anno

Indice

• Descrizione indicatore
• Come si legge
• Fonte del dato
• Valutazione istituzionale
• Altre informazioni

Descrizione indicatore

L’indicatore ci consente di calcolare il numero di interventi chirurgici di angioplastica coronarica (con PTCA) eseguiti in un anno in una struttura ospedaliera.

Questo numero rappresenta il "volume" di interventi (indicatore di "volume").

Come si legge

L’indicatore si riferisce al grado di “competenza" e di “sicurezza" delle cure prestate.

Più alto è il numero d’interventi chirurgici di angioplastica coronarica (PTCA) eseguiti in una struttura ospedaliera, maggiore è il grado di esperienza della struttura stessa e la sicurezza del trattamento offerto.

Fonte del dato

Programma Nazionale Esiti 2024.
Confronto tra strutture calcolato su dati 2023.

Nota bene: per tener conto di errori nell’attribuzione di condizioni/interventi a singoli ospedali, sono state escluse dalle analisi tutte le strutture con volumi di attività molto bassi in relazione alla condizione considerata (volume di attività minimo 10 casi/anno).
Come riportato nel documento elaborato dal PNE, la definizione dell’esposizione sulla base dei volumi della struttura piuttosto che dell’unità operativa potrebbe essere soggetta a misclassificazione.
Le informazioni contenute nelle SDO non consentono di identificare validamente le PTCA eseguite in service in strutture diverse da quella di degenza. Questo comporta una possibile misclassificazione del volume di attività, con sovrastima del numero degli ospedali a basso volume a cui viene attribuita l’esecuzione della procedura e una sottostima del volume di PTCA di altri ospedali.

Valutazione istituzionale

Il Ministero della Salute ha stabilito che un ospedale dovrebbe eseguire almeno 250 procedure all’anno di cui almeno il 30% angioplastiche primarie in infarto del miocardio con sopra-slivellamento del tratto ST (IMA-STEMI).
 
Il semaforo è calcolato sulla base del seguente documento ufficiale:

• Ministero della Salute. Decreto 2 aprile 2015. n.70.

Consulta le strutture sanitarie che effettuano in un anno il maggior numero di interventi chirurgici di Angioplastica coronarica (con PTCA) 
Approfondisci anche gli altri indicatori relativi a:

• Infarto miocardico acuto: Percentuale di pazienti che eseguono l'angioplastica entro 90 minuti dall'arrivo in ospedale
• Infarto miocardico acuto: Ricoveri eseguiti in un anno
• Infarto miocardico acuto: Sopravvivenza a 30 giorni dal ricovero

Altre informazioni

Codici ICD-9-CM selezionati
Sono inclusi tutti i ricoveri, in regime ordinario, con i seguenti codici ICD-9-CM in qualsiasi campo di procedura: 00.66, 36.01, 36.02, 36.05, 36.06, 36.07.
 
Il volume di ricoveri per interventi chirurgici è calcolato su base annuale, riferito all’anno di dimissione del ricovero.
Fonti scientifiche

• Gruppo di lavoro del Programma Nazionale Esiti. Amato L, Fusco D, Acampora A, Bontempi K, Rosa AC, Colais P, Cruciani F, D’Ovidio M, Mataloni F, Minozzi S, Mitrova Z, Pinnarelli L, Saulle R, Soldati S, Sorge C, Vecchi S, Ventura M, Davoli M. Volume and health outcomes: evidence from systematic reviews and from evaluation of Italian hospital data. Epidemiol Prev. 2017 Sep-Dec;41(5-6 Suppl 2):1-128. doi: 10.19191/EP17.5-6S2.P001.100.
• Cerza F, Cicala SD, Bernardini F, et al. Relazione tra volumi di attività ed esiti dell’assistenza ospedaliera. Evidenze epidemiologiche a supporto del processo di revisione del Decreto del Ministero della Salute n. 70 del 2 aprile 2015. Recenti Prog Med 2022; 113: 114-22.
• Strom J,Wimmer N,Wasfy J,Yeh R. Re-examining the operator volume-outcomes relationship in percutaneous coronary intervention: A systematic review. J Am Coll Cardiol 2014;63(12):A1700.
• Lin X, Tao H, Cai M,Liao A, Cheng Z,Lin H.A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Relationship between Hospital Volume and the Outcomes of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention. Medicine (Baltimore) 2016;95(5):e2687. doi:10.1097/MD.0000000000002687.
• Dudley RA, Johansen KL, Brand R, Rennie DJ, Milstein A. Selective referral to high-volume hospitals: estimating potentially avoidable deaths. JAMA 2000; 283(9):1159-66.
• Gandjour A, Bannerberg A, Lauterbach KW. Threshold volumes associated with higher survival in health care. Med Care 2003;41(10):1129-41.
• Halm EA, Lee C, Chassin MR. Is volume related to outcome in health care? A systematic review and methodologic critique of the literature. Ann Intern Med 2002:137(6):511-20.
• Post PN,Wittenberg J, Burgers JS. Do specialized centers and specialists produce better outcomes for patients with chronic diseases than primary care generalists? A systematic review. Int J Qual Health Care 2009;21(6):387-96.
• Akin I, Hochadel M, Schneider S et al. Volume-outcomes relationship in the era of modern coronary intervention-results from the prospective multicenter German DES.DE Registry. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2013;82(6):E788-97.
• Allareddy V, Allareddy V, Konety BR. Specificity of procedure volume and in-hospital mortality association. Ann Surg 2007;246(1):135-39.
• Allareddy V, Ward MM, Allareddy V, Konety BR. Effect of meeting Leapfrog volume thresholds on complication rates following complex surgical procedures. Ann Surg 2010;251(2):377-83.
• Badheka AO, Patel NJ, Grover P et al. Impact of annual operator and institutional volume on percutaneous coronary intervention outcomes: a 5-year United States experience (2005-2009). Circulation 2014;130(16):1392-406.
• Burton KR, Slack R, Oldroyd KG 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 2006;92(11):1667-72.
• Cannon CP, Gibson CM, Lambrew CT et al. Relationship of symptom-onset-to-balloon time and door-to-balloon time with mortality in patients undergoing angioplasty for acute myocardial infarction. JAMA 2000;283(22):2941-47.
• Canto JG, Every NR, Magid DJ et al. The volume of primary angioplasty procedures and survival after acute myocardial infarction. National Registry of Myocardial Infarction 2 Investigators. N Eng J Med 2000;342(21):1573-80.
• Cantor WJ, Hall R, Tu JV. Do operator volumes relate to clinical outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention in the Canadian health care system? Am Heart J 2006;151(4):902-08.
• Carey JS, Danielsen B, Gold JP, Rossiter SJ. Procedure rates and outcomes of coronary revascularization procedures in California and New York. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2005;129(6):1276-82.
• Ellis SG,Weintraub W, Holmes D, Shaw R, Block PC, King SB 3rd. Relation of operator volume and experience to procedural outcome of percutaneous coronary revascularization at hospitals with high interventional volumes. Circulation 1997;95(11):2479-84.
• Every NR, Maynard C, Schulman K, Ritchie JL. The association between institutional primary angioplasty procedure volume and outcome in elderly Americans. J Invasive Cardiol 2000;12(6):303-08.
• Grassman ED, Johnson SA, Krone RJ. Predictors of success and major complications for primary percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty in acute myocardial infarction. An analysis of the 1990 to 1994 Society for Cardiac Angiography and Interventions registries. J Am Coll Cardiol 1997;30(1):201-08.
• Hannan EL, Racz M, Ryan TJ et al. Coronary angioplasty volume-outcome relationships for hospitals and cardiologists. JAMA 1997;277(11):892-98.
• Hannan EL, Wu C, Walford G et al. Volume-outcome relationships for percutaneous coronary interventions in the stent era. Circulation 2005;112(8):1171-79.
• Harjai KJ, Berman AD, Grines CL et al. Impact of interventionalist volume, experience, and board certification on coronary angioplasty outcomes in the era of stenting. Am J Cardiol 2004;94(4):421-26.
• Ho V. Evolution of the volume-outcome relation for hospitals performing coronary angioplasty. Circulation 2000;101(15):1806-11.
• Jollis JG, Peterson ED, DeLong ER et al. The relation between the volume of coronary angioplasty procedures at hospitals treating Medicare beneficiaries and short-term mortality. N Engl J Med 1994;331(24):1625-29.
• Jollis JG, Peterson ED, Nelson CL et al. Relationship between physician and hospital coronary angioplasty volume and outcome in elderly patients. Circulation 1997;95(11):2485-91.
• Kansagra SM, Curtis LH, Anstrom KJ, Schulman KA. Trends in operator and hospital procedure volume and outcomes for percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty, 1996 to 2001. Am J Cardiol 2007;99(3):339-43.
• Kastrati A, Neumann FJ, Schömig A. Operator volume and outcome of patients undergoing coronary stent placement. J Am Coll Cardiol 1998;32(4):970-76.
• Khattab AA, Hamm CW, Senges J et al. Sirolimus eluting stent treatment at high- volume centers confers lower mortality at 6-month follow-up: results from the prospective multicenter German Cypher Registry. Circulation 2009;120(7):600-06.
• Kim YH, Her AY. Relationship between hospital volume and risk-adjusted mortality rate following percutaneous coronary intervention in Korea, 2003 to 2004. Anadolu Kardiyol Derg 2013;13(3):237-42.
• Kimmel SE, Berlin JA, Laskey WK. The relationship between coronary angioplasty procedure volume and major complications. JAMA 1995;274(14):1137-42.
• Kimmel SE, Sauer WH, Brensinger C, Hirshfeld J, Haber HL, Localio AR. Relationship between coronary angioplasty laboratory volume and outcomes after hospital discharge. Am Heart J 2002;143(5):833-40.
• Klein LW, Schaer GL, Calvin JE et al. Does low individual operator coronary interventional procedural volume correlate with worse institutional procedural outcome? J Am Coll Cardiol 1997;30(4):870-77.
• Kontos MC, Wang Y, Chaudhry SI et al. Lower hospital volume is associated with higher in-hospital mortality in patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention for ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction: a report from the NCDR. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes 2013;6(6):659-67.
• Kumbhani DJ, Cannon CP, Fonarow GC et al. Association of hospital primary angioplasty volume in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction with quality and outcomes. JAMA 2009;302(20):2207-13.
• Kuwabara H, Fushimi K, Matsuda S. Relationship between hospital volume and outcomes following primary percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with acute myocardial infarction. Circ J 2011;75(5):1107-12.
• Lin HC, Lee HC, Chu CH. The volume–outcome relationship of percutaneous coronary intervention: can current procedure volume minimums be applied to a developing country? Am Heart J 2008;155(3):547-52.
• Lindsay J Jr, Pinnow EE, Pichard AD. Frequency of major adverse cardiac events within one month of coronary angioplasty: a useful measure of operator performance. J Am Coll Cardiol 1999;34(7):1916-23.
• Madan M, Nikhil J, Hellkamp AS et al. Effect of operator and institutional volume on clinical outcomes after percutaneous coronary interventions performed in Canada and the United States: a brief report from the Enhanced Suppression of the Platelet glycoprotein IIb/IIIa Receptor with Integrilin Therapy (ESPRIT) study. Can J Cardiol 2009;25(8):e269-72.
• Magid DJ, Calonge BN, Rumsfeld JS et al; National Registry of Myocardial Infarction 2 and 3 Investigators. Relation between hospital primary angioplasty volume and mortality for patients with acute MI treated with primary angioplasty vs thrombolytic therapy. JAMA 2000;284(24):3131-8.
• Malenka DJ, McGrath PD, Wennberg DE et al. The relationship between operator volume and outcomes after percutaneous coronary interventions in high volume hospitals in 1994-1996: the Northern New England experience. Northern New England Cardiovascular Disease Study Group. J Am Coll Cardiol 1999;34(5):1471-80.
• Maynard C, Every NR, ChapkoMK, Ritchie JL. Institutional volumes and coronary angioplasty outcomes before and after the introduction of stenting. Eff Clin Pract 1999;2(3):108-13.
• McGrath PD, Wennberg DE, Malenka DJ et al. Operator volume and outcomes in 12,998 percutaneous coronary interventions. Northern New England Cardiovascular Disease Study Group. J Am Coll Cardiol 1998;31(3):570-76.
• McGrath PD,Wennberg DE, Dickens JD Jr et al. Relation between operator and hospital volume and outcomes following percutaneous coronary interventions in the era of the coronary stent. JAMA 2000;284(24):3139-44.
• Moscucci M, Share D, Smith D et al. Relationship between operator volume and adverse outcome in contemporary percutaneous coronary intervention practice: an analysis of a quality-controlled multicenter percutaneous coronary intervention clinical database. J Am Coll Cardiol 2005;46(4):625-32.
• Mueller C, Hodgson JM, Brutsche M et al. Operator experience and long term outcome after percutaneous coronary intervention. Can J Cardiol 2003;19(9):1047-51.
• Mustafa MU, Cohen M, Zapotulko K et al. The lack of a simple relation between physician’s percutaneous coronary intervention volume and outcomes in the   era of coronary stenting: a two-centre experience. Int J Clin Pract 2005;59(12): 1401-07.
• Phillips KA, Luft HS, Ritchie JL. The association of hospital volumes of percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty with adverse outcomes, length of stay, and charges in California. Med Care 1995;33(5):502-14.
• Politi A, Galli M, Zerboni S et al. Operator volume and outcomes of primary angioplasty for acute myocardial infarction in a single high-volume centre. J Cardiovasc Med (Hagerstown) 2006;7(10):761-67.
• Ritchie JL, Maynard C, Chapko MK, Every NR, Martin DC. Association between
percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty volumes and outcomes in the 
Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project 1993-1994. Am J Cardiol 1999;83(4):
493-97.
• Ritchie JL, Phillips KA, Luft HS. Coronary angioplasty. Statewide experience in California. Circulation 1993;88(6):2735-43. 

• Shiraishi J, Kohno Y, Sawada T et al. Effects of hospital volume of primary percutaneous coronary interventions on angiographic results and in-hospital outcomes for acute myocardial infarction. Circ J 2008;72(7):1041-46.
• Shook TL, Sun GW, Burstein S, Eisenhauer AC, Matthews RV. Comparison of percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty outcome and hospital costs for low-
volume and high-volume operators. Am J Cardiol 1996;77(5):331-36. 

• Srinivas VS, Hailpern SM, Koss E, Monrad ES, Alderman MH. Effect of physician
volume on the relationship between hospital volume and mortality during primary angioplasty. J Am Coll Cardiol 2009;53(7):574-79.
• Tsuchihashi M, Tsutsui H, Tada H, Shihara M, Takeshita A, Kono S; Japanese Coronary Intervention Study (JCIS) Group. Volume-outcome relation for hospitals performing angioplasty for acute myocardial infarction: results from the Nationwide
Japanese Registry. Circ J 2004; 68(10):887-91. 

• Vakili BA, Kaplan R, Brown DL. Volume-outcome relation for physicians and hospitals performing angioplasty for acute myocardial infarction in New York state. Circulation 2001;104(18):2171-76. 

• Vakili BA, Brown DL; 1995 Coronary Angioplasty Reporting System of the New
York State Department of Health. Relation of total annual coronary angioplasty volume of physicians and hospitals on outcomes of primary angioplasty for acute myocardial infarction (data from the 1995 Coronary Angioplasty Reporting System
 of the New York State Department of Health). Am J Cardiol 2003;91(6):726-28.
• Xie Y, Rizzo JA, Brown DL.  A modified method for estimating volume outcome relationships: application to percutaneous coronary intervention. J Med Econ 2008; 11(1):57-70. 

• Zahn R, Vogt A, Seidl K et alt. Balloon dilatation in acute myocardial infarct in routine clinical practice: results of the register of the Working Society of Leading Cardiologic Hospital Physicians in 4,625 patients. Z Kardiol 1997;86(9):712-21. 

• Zahn R, Gottwik M, Hochadel M et al. Volume-outcome relation for contemporary percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) in daily clinical practice: is it limted to high-risk patients? Results from the Registry of Percutaneous Coronary Interventions of the Arbeitsgemeinschaft Leitende Kardiologische Krankenhausarzte (ALKK). Heart 2008;94(3):329-35.