Skip Navigation

European Heart Journal 1999 20(5):354-363; doi:10.1053/euhj.1998.1198
Copyright © 1999 by the European Society of Cardiology.
This Article
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow References
Right arrow E-letters: Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when E-letters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (9)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Budde, Th.
Right arrow Articles by Wischnewsky, M.B.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Budde, Th.
Right arrow Articles by Wischnewsky, M.B.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

A prognostic computer model to individually predict post-procedural complications in interventional cardiology; the INTERVENT Project

BuddeTh. a,b,f1, M. Haudec, H.W. Höppd, S. Kerbera, G. Casparic, G. Faßbenderd, M. Fingerhuta, I. Novopashennye, Y. Ogurole, G. Breithardta, R. Erbelc, E. Erdmannd and M.B. Wischnewskye

a Department of Cardiology and Angiology, Institute for Research in Arteriosclerosis, Hospital of the Westfälische Wilhelms-University of Münster, Münster
b Department of Internal Medicine and Cardiology, Alfried Krupp Hospital, Essen
c Cardiology Department, University of Essen, Essen
d Clinic III for Internal Medicine, University of Cologne, Cologne
e Laboratory for Artificial Intelligence, University of Bremen, Bremen, Germany

revised June 13, 1998; accepted June 17, 1998

Abstract

Aims

The purpose of this part of the INTERVENT project was (1) to redefine and individually predict post-procedural complications associated with coronary interventions, including alternative/adjunctive techniques to PTCA and (2) to employ the prognostic INTERVENT computer model to clarify the structural relationship between (pre)-procedural risk factors and post-procedural outcome.

Methods and Results

In a multicentre study, 2500 data items of 455 consecutive patients (mean age: 61·1±8·3 years; 33–84 years) undergoing coronary interventions at three university centres were analysed. 80·4% of the patients were male, 16·7% had unstable angina, and 5·1%/10·1% acute/subacute myocardial infarction. There were multiple or multivessel stenoses in 16·0%, vessel bending >90° in 14·5%, irregular vessel contours in 65·0%, moderate calcifications in 20·9%, moderate/severe vessel tortuosity in 53·2% and a diameter stenosis of 90%–99% in 44·4% of cases. The in-lab (out-of-lab) complications were: 0·4% (0·9%) death, 1·8% (0·2%) abrupt vessel closure with myocardial infarction and 5·5% (4·0) haemodynamic disorders.

Conclusion

Computer algorithms derived from artificial intelligence were able to predict the individual risk of these post-procedural complications with an accuracy of >95% and to explain the structural relationship between risk factors and post-procedural complications. The most important prognostic factors were: heart failure (NYHA class), use of adjunctive/alternative techniques (rotablation, atherectomy, laser), acute coronary ischaemia, pre-existent cardiac medication, stenosis length, stenosis morphology (calcification), gender, age, amount of contrast agent and smoker status. Pre-medication with aspirin or other cardiac medication had a beneficial effect. Techniques, such as laser angioplasty or atherectomy were predictors for post-procedural complications. Single predictors alone were not able to describe the individual outcome completely.

Key Words: Artificial intelligence • computer model • interventional cardiology • postprocedural complications • PTCA • risk prediction

f1 Correspondence: PD Dr med. Thomas Budde, Klinik für Innere Medizin I und Kardiologie, Alfried Krupp Krankenhaus, Alfried-Krupp-Str. 21, D-45117 Essen, Germany.

Topol, EJ


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Circ Cardiovasc IntervHome page
J. E. Tcheng, I. H. Lim, S. Srinivasan, J. Jozic, C. M. Gibson, J. C. O'Shea, J. A. Puma, and D. I. Simon
Stent Parameters Predict Major Adverse Clinical Events and the Response to Platelet Glycoprotein IIb/IIIa Blockade: Findings of the ESPRIT Trial
Circ Cardiovasc Interv, February 1, 2009; 2(1): 43 - 51.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J Am Coll CardiolHome page
M. A. Qureshi, R. D. Safian, C. L. Grines, J. A. Goldstein, D. C. Westveer, S. Glazier, M. Balasubramanian, and W. W. O'Neill
Simplified scoring system for predicting mortality after percutaneous coronary intervention
J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., December 3, 2003; 42(11): 1890 - 1895.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Eur Heart JHome page
A. Vogt
Letters to the Editor: Predicting complications in interventional cardiology
Eur. Heart J., October 1, 1999; 20(19): 1435 - 1435.
[PDF]



Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.