It is unclear if clinician risk stratification has changed with time. The aim of this study was to assess the temporal change in the concordance between patient presenting risk and the intensity of ...evidence-based therapies received for non–ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes over a 9-year period. Data from 3,562 patients with non–ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes enrolled in the Australian and New Zealand population of the Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events (GRACE) from 1999 to 2007 were analyzed. Patients were stratified to risk groups on the basis of the GRACE risk score for in-hospital mortality. Main outcome measures included in-hospital use of widely accepted evidence-based medications, investigations, and procedures. Invasive management was consistently higher in low-risk patients than in intermediate- or high-risk patients (coronary angiography 66.7% vs 63.5% vs 35.3%, p <0.001; percutaneous coronary intervention 31.1% vs 22.0% vs 12.9%, p <0.001). Absolute rates of angiography and percutaneous coronary intervention in the high-risk group remained 24% and 15% lower compared to the low-risk group in the most recent time period (2005 to 2007). In-hospital use of thienopyridine, low–molecular weight heparin, and glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors showed a similar inverse relation with risk. Prescription of aspirin, β blockers, statins, and angiotensin receptor blockers was inversely related to risk before 2004, although this inverse relation was no longer present in the most recent time period (2005 to 2007). Only in-hospital use of unfractionated heparin showed use concordant with patient risk status. In conclusion, despite an overall increase in the uptake of evidence-based therapies, most investigations and treatments are not targeted on the basis of patient risk. Clinician risk stratification remains suboptimal compared to objective measures of patient risk.
Background Haematoma formation is a recognised complication after permanent pacemaker (PPM) implantation. The contribution of peri-procedural anticoagulation to the risk of haematoma formation is ...unclear. Method The records of 518 consecutive patients, mean age 76.9 ± 9.8 years, receiving their first PPM (2004–2007) in a single tertiary referral centre were reviewed. Follow-up was complete for 506 patients (97.7%) up to six weeks. Haematomas were diagnosed clinically, and further subdivided according to the need for evacuation. Results There were 27 instances of haematoma formation in 25 patients (4.9%) with 19 requiring drainage or evacuation. Twenty-one of the 25 patients who developed a haematoma had stopped warfarin and received bridging therapeutic anticoagulation pre- and post-PPM. The incidence of haematoma was significantly greater in those receiving peri-operative therapeutic anticoagulation (26.9% vs 0.9%, p < 0.001), but was unaffected by the use of anti-platelet therapy. Most haematomas developed in patients whose heparin was recommenced within 24 hours of implantation. The development of haematoma post-PPM increased median hospital stay significantly ( p < 0.001). The main indication for anticoagulation in these patients was atrial fibrillation (79.5%) and most of these patients had a low to intermediate risk of peri-procedural thromboembolic events. Conclusion Peri-operative therapeutic anticoagulation is associated with more than 25-fold increase in haematoma formation post-pacemaker implantation. The risk-benefit ratio of therapeutic anticoagulation should be carefully considered, particularly in patients with a low risk of thromboembolic events.
