Methods and Results— Participants (n=3522) with documented coronary heart disease were randomized to experimental (n=1777) or control (n=1745) groups. Experimental patients received education and counseling about ACS symptoms and actions required. Patients had a mean age of 67±11 years, and 68% were male. Over the 2 years of follow-up, 565 patients (16.0%) were admitted to an emergency department with ACS symptoms a total of 842 times. Neither median prehospital delay time (experimental, 2.20 versus control, 2.25 hours) nor emergency medical system use (experimental, 63.6% versus control, 66.9%) was different between groups, although experimental patients were more likely than control to call the emergency medical system if the symptoms occurred within the first 6 months following the intervention (P=0.036). Experimental patients were significantly more likely to take aspirin after symptom onset than control patients (experimental, 22.3% versus control, 10.1%, P=0.02). The intervention did not result in an increase in emergency department use (experimental, 14.6% versus control, 17.5%).

Conclusions— The education and counseling intervention did not lead to reduced prehospital delay or increased ambulance use. Reducing the time from onset of ACS symptoms to arrival at the hospital continues to be a significant public health challenge.

Clinical Trial Registration— clinicaltrials.gov. Identifier NCT00734760.

Methods and Results— In 3 large tertiary care institutions (university, Veterans Affairs, and private practice) in Washtenaw County, Mich, patients were identified with unrefuted echocardiography/Doppler evidence of severe AS during calendar year 2005. Medical records were retrospectively reviewed for symptoms, referral for AVR, calculated operative risk for AVR, and rationale as to why patients did not undergo valve replacement. Of 369 patients with severe AS, 191 (52%) did not undergo AVR. Of these, 126 (66%, 34% of total) had symptoms consistent with AS. The most common reasons cited for absent intervention were comorbidities with high operative risk (61 patients [48%]), patent refusal (24 patients [19%]), and symptoms unrelated to AS (24 patients [19%]). Operated patients had a lower Society of Thoracic Surgery–calculated perioperative mortality risk than unoperated patients (1.8% [interquartile range, 1.0 to 3.0%] versus 2.7% [interquartile range, 1.6 to 5.5%], P<0.001). However, 28 (24%) of 126 unoperated symptomatic patients had a calculated perioperative risk less than the median risk for patients who underwent AVR. Only 57 (30%) of 191 unoperated patients were evaluated by a cardiac surgeon. There were similar rates of intervention across practice settings, and similar rates of unoperated patients despite symptoms and low operative risk.

Conclusions— One third of patients with severe AS are symptomatic but do not undergo AVR, with similar findings in multiple practice environments. For most unoperated patients, objectively calculated operative risks did not appear prohibitive. Despite this, a minority of unoperated patients were referred for surgical consultation. Some patients with severe symptomatic AS may be inappropriately denied access to potentially life-saving therapy.

Methods and Results— We analyzed data from patients of a national acute coronary syndrome registry undergoing an audit about the comprehensiveness of the recruitment/inclusion. Patients initially included by hospital investigators (n=3265) were compared to eligible nonincluded (missed) patients (n=1439). We assessed, for 25 exposure variables, the deviation of the in-hospital mortality relative risks calculated in the initial sample from the actual relative risks. Missed patients were of higher risk and received less recommended therapies than the included patients. In-hospital mortality was almost 3 times higher in the missed population (9.34% [95% CI, 7.84 to 10.85] versus 3.9% [95% CI, 2.89 to 4.92]). Initial relative risks diverged from the actual relative risks more than expected by chance (P<0.05) in 21 variables, being higher than 10% in 17 variables. This deviation persisted on a smaller degree on multivariable analysis. Additionally, we reviewed a sample of 129 patient registries focused on acute coronary syndrome published in thirteen journals, collecting information on good registry performance items. Only in 38 (29.4%) and 48 (37.2%) registries was any audit of recruitment/inclusion and data abstraction, respectively, mentioned. Only 4 (3.1%) authors acknowledged potential selection bias because of incomplete recruitment.

Conclusions— Irregular inclusion can introduce substantial systematic bias in registries. This problem has not been explicitly addressed in a substantial number of them.

Methods and Results— A total of 3999 individuals hospitalized with a principal diagnosis of heart failure at 6 California teaching hospitals between January 1, 2001, and June 30, 2005, were analyzed with multivariate risk-adjustment models for total hospital days, total hospital direct costs, and mortality within 180-days after initial admission ("Looking Forward"). A subset of 1639 individuals who died during the study period were analyzed with multivariate risk-adjustment models for total hospital days and total hospital direct costs within 180-days before death ("Looking Back"). "Looking Forward" risk-adjusted hospital means ranged from 17.0% to 26.0% for mortality, 7.8 to 14.9 days for total hospital days, and 0.66 to 1.30 times the mean value for indexed total direct costs. Spearman rank correlation coefficients were –0.68 between mortality and hospital days, and –0.93 between mortality and indexed total direct costs. "Looking Back" risk-adjusted hospital means ranged from 9.1 to 21.7 days for total hospital days and 0.91 to 1.79 times the mean value for indexed total direct costs. Variation in resource use site ranks between expired and all individuals were attributable to insignificant differences.

Conclusions— California teaching hospitals that used more resources caring for patients hospitalized for heart failure had lower mortality rates. Focusing only on expired individuals may overlook mortality variation as well as associations between greater resource use and lower mortality. Reporting values without identifying significant differences may result in incorrect assumption of true differences.

Methods and Results— Using hierarchical regression models based on medical administrative data from the period July 1, 2005, to June 30, 2006, we calculated risk-standardized mortality rates and risk-standardized readmission rates for ranked and nonranked hospitals in the treatment of heart failure. The mortality analysis examined 14 813 patients in 50 ranked hospitals and 409 806 patients in 4761 nonranked hospitals. The readmission analysis included 16 641 patients in 50 ranked hospitals and 458 473 patients in 4627 nonranked hospitals. Mean 30-day risk-standardized mortality rates were lower in ranked versus nonranked hospitals (10.1% versus 11.2%, P<0.01), whereas mean 30-day risk-standardized readmission rates were no different between ranked and nonranked hospitals (23.6% versus 23.8%, P=0.40). The 30-day risk-standardized mortality rates varied widely for both ranked and nonranked hospitals, ranging from 7.9% to 12.4% for ranked hospitals and from 7.1% to 17.5% for nonranked hospitals. The 30-day risk-standardized readmission rates also spanned a large range, from 18.7% to 29.3% for ranked hospitals and from 19.2% to 29.8% for nonranked hospitals.

Conclusions— Hospitals ranked by U.S. News & World Report as "America’s Best Hospitals" in "Heart & Heart Surgery" are more likely than nonranked hospitals to have a significantly lower than expected 30-day mortality rate, but there was much overlap in performance. For readmission, the rates were similar in ranked and nonranked hospitals.

Methods and Results— We developed a decision-analytic model to explore the clinical outcomes and associated costs of ultrafiltration compared to intravenous diuretics for index and subsequent acute heart failure hospitalizations to 90 days from index hospitalization. We evaluated the model from societal, Medicare, and hospital payer perspectives. Base-case probabilities and costs were derived from the Ultrafiltration versus Intravenous Diuretics for Patients Hospitalized for Acute Decompensated Congestive Heart Failure clinical trial, Medicare reimbursement schedules, and published data. From a societal perspective, treatment with ultrafiltration had an 86% probability of being more expensive than intravenous diuretics in probabilistic sensitivity analysis, with a base-case estimate of $13 469 per patient treated with ultrafiltration compared to $11 610 per patient treated with intravenous diuretics. Cost estimates were most influenced by length of index hospitalization, daily cost of rehospitalization, number of days rehospitalized, and number and cost of ultrafiltration filters. From a Medicare payer perspective, ultrafiltration had a >99% probability of being cost saving. From a hospital perspective, there was a 97% probability ultrafiltration was more expensive. Our model suggested similar 90-day mortality rates between treatment arms.

Conclusion— Despite a reduction in rehospitalization rates, it is unlikely ultrafiltration results in cost savings from a societal perspective. The discordance in cost between societal, Medicare, and hospital perspectives underscores the importance of payer perspective in formulating strategies and reimbursement structures to reduce heart failure hospitalizations.

Methods and Results— The National Registry of Myocardial Infarction enrolled 58 821 STEMI patients from 214 OHS hospitals (n=54 076) and 52 No-OHS hospitals (n=4745) with PCI capabilities from 2004 to 2006. Patients presenting to OHS hospitals had substantially lower in-hospital mortality (7.0% versus 9.8%, P<0.001) and were more likely to receive any form of acute reperfusion therapy (80.8% versus 70.8%, P<0.001). Patients who presented to OHS hospitals were more likely to receive guideline recommended medications within 24 hours of arrival. In a propensity score model matching for patient characteristics and transfer status, in-hospital mortality remained significantly lower among patients presenting to OHS hospitals (7.2% versus 9.3%, P=0.025). When this model was further adjusted for differences in the use of acute reperfusion therapy, medications administered within 24 hours and hospital characteristics, the mortality difference was of borderline significance (hazard ratio, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.75 to 1.01; P=0.067). When the propensity score analysis was restricted to patients who underwent pPCI, there was no significant difference in mortality (3.8% versus 3.3%, P=0.44).

Conclusions— STEMI patients presenting to No-OHS hospitals have substantially higher mortality, are less likely to receive guideline recommended medications within 24 hours, and are less likely to undergo acute reperfusion therapy, although this difference was of borderline significance after adjusting for hospital and treatment variables. There was no difference in mortality among patients undergoing pPCI.

Methods and Results— We evaluated 528 686 CABG patients at >800 hospitals in the Society of Thoracic Surgeons National Cardiac Database (2004 to 2007). Clinical features and in-hospital outcomes were evaluated in patients with and without reoperation for bleeding after CABG. Logistic regression was used to identify predictors of risk of this event and to estimate weights for an additive risk score. A total of 12 652 CABG patients (2.4%) required reoperation for bleeding. These rates remained fairly stable over time (2.2%, 2.3%, 2.5%, and 2.4% from 2004 to 2007, respectively). Although overall operative mortality was 4.5-fold higher in patients requiring reoperation for bleeding versus those who did not (2.0% versus 9.1%), this mortality risk declined significantly over time (11.3%, 9.5%, 8.8%, and 8.2% from 2004 to 2007, respectively, P for trend=0.0006). Factors associated with higher risk for reoperation were identified by multivariable analysis (c statistic=0.60) and summarized into a simple bedside risk score. The risk-score performed well when tested in the validation set (Hosmer-Lemeshow P=0.16).

Conclusions— Reoperation for bleeding remains an important morbid event after CABG. Nonetheless, death in patients with this complication has decreased over time. Our risk tool should allow estimation of patients risk for reoperation for bleeding and promote preventive measures when feasible in this at-risk group.

Methods and Results— We prospectively collected data from 47 community-based clinics located throughout the United States from 2000 to 2002. We examined risk factors for low INR (≤1.5), reasons given in the medical record for low INR, and proportion of thromboembolic events that occurred during periods of low INR. Of the 4489 patients in our database, 1540 (34%) had at least 1 low INR. Compared with men, women had an increased incidence of low INR (adjusted incidence rate ratio, 1.44; P<0.001). Compared with patients anticoagulated for atrial fibrillation, patients anticoagulated for venous thromboembolism had an increased incidence of low INR (adjusted incidence rate ratio, 1.48; P<0.001). The 5 most common reasons for low INR were nonadherence (17%), interruptions for procedures (16%), recent dose reductions (15%), no reason apparent after questioning (15%), and second or greater consecutive low INR (13%). A total of 21.8% of thromboembolic events (95% CI, 12.2 to 35.4%) occurred during periods of low INR; 58% of these events were related to an interruption of warfarin therapy.

Conclusions— In this cohort of patients receiving warfarin, more than 1 in 5 thromboembolic events occurred during a period of low INR. Women and patients anticoagulated for venous thromboembolism were particularly likely to experience low INR. Improving adherence, minimizing interruptions of therapy, and addressing low INR more promptly could reduce the risk of low INR.

Methods and Results— Data on 10-year risk of CHD (from the First National Health and Nutrition Examination Epidemiological Follow-Up study 1971 to 1982), prevalence of major CHD risk factors (from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 2003 to 2004), and HP2010 targets for CHD risk factors (reduction of smoking rate to 12%, hypertension to 14%, high cholesterol levels to 17%, diabetes to 2.5%, and obesity to 15%) were used to estimate effects of different scenarios on population levels and social disparities in CHD. Over a 10-year period, the largest relative reductions in population levels of CHD (20.0% in men; 23.9% in women) would be achieved if all social groups met the HP2010 targets. CHD disparities would be most reduced if the less educated (absolute disparities reduced by 66.1% in men; 56.3% in women) and the low income group (absolute disparities reduced by 93.7% in men; 94.3% in women) achieved the targets before the most advantaged. These reductions are larger than those expected if targets were achieved overall for the population but relative social group differences in risk factors remained, or under leveling-up approaches in which the least advantaged achieved the current levels of risk factors of the most advantaged.

Conclusions— Interventions to reduce CHD risk factors to HP2010 targets that focus on all social groups would produce the best overall scenario for both population levels and disparities in CHD.

Methods and Results— Temporal trends in post-PCI symptoms were analyzed using 8879 consecutive patients enrolled in the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute–sponsored Dynamic Registry (wave 1: 1997 [bare metal stents], wave 2: 1999 [uniform use of stents], wave 3: 2001 [brachytherapy], wave 4, 5: 2004, 2006 [drug eluting stents]). Patients undergoing PCI in the recent waves were older and more often reported comorbidities. However, fewer patients across the waves reported post-PCI angina at one year (wave 1 to 5: 24%, 23%, 18%, 20%, 20%; P_trend<0.001). The lower risk of angina in recent waves was explained by patient characteristics including use of antianginal medications at discharge (relative risk [95% CI] for waves 2, 3, 4 versus 1: 1.0 [0.9 to 1.2], 0.9 [0.7 to 1.1], 1.0 [0.8 to 1.3], 0.9 [0.7 to 1.1]). Similar trend was seen in the average quality of life scores over time (adjusted mean score for waves 1 to 5: 6.2, 6.5, 6.6 and 6.6; P_trend=0.01). Other factors associated with angina at 1 year included younger age, female gender, prior revascularization, need for repeat PCI, and hospitalization for myocardial infarction over 1 year.

Conclusion— Favorable temporal trends are seen in patient-reported symptoms after PCI in routine clinical practice. Specific subgroups, however, remain at risk for symptoms at 1 year and thus warrant closer attention.

Methods and Results— Absolute risk reductions and consequent number needed to treat (NNT) values were calculated across a range of end points, timeframes, and subgroups using data from Justification for the Use of statins in Prevention: an Intervention Trial Evaluating Rosuvastatin (JUPITER), a randomized evaluation of rosuvastatin 20 mg versus placebo conducted among 17 802 apparently healthy men and women with low-density lipoprotein cholesterol <130 mg/dL and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein ≥2 mg/L. Sensitivity analyses were also performed to address the potential impact that alternative statin regimens might have on a similar primary prevention population. For the end point of myocardial infarction, stroke, revascularization, or death, the 5-year NNT within JUPITER was 20 (95% CI, 14 to 34). All subgroups had 5-year NNT values for this end point below 50; as examples, 5-year NNT values were 17 for men and 31 for women, 21 for whites and 19 for nonwhites, 18 for those with body mass index ≤25 kg/m² and 21 for those with body mass index greater than 25 kg/m², 9 and 26 for those with and without a family history of coronary disease, 19 and 22 for those with and without metabolic syndrome, and 14 and 37 for those with estimated Framingham risks greater or less than 10%. For the net vascular benefit end point that additionally included venous thromboembolism, the 5-year NNT was 18 (95% CI, 13 to 29). For the restricted "hard" end point of myocardial infarction, stroke, or death, the 5-year NNT was 29 (95% CI, 19 to 56). In sensitivity analyses addressing the theoretical utility of alternative agents, 5-year NNT values of 38 and 57 were estimated for statin regimens that deliver 75% and 50% of the relative benefit observed in JUPITER, respectively. All of these calculations compare favorably to 5-year NNT values previously reported in primary prevention for the use of statins among hyperlipidemic men (5-year NNT, 40 to 70), for antihypertensive therapy (5-year NNT, 80 to 160), or for aspirin (5-year NNT, >300).

Conclusions— Absolute risk reductions and consequent NNT values associated with statin therapy among those with elevated high-sensitivity C-reactive protein and low low-density lipoprotein cholesterol are comparable if not superior to published NNT values for several widely accepted interventions for primary cardiovascular prevention, including the use of statin therapy among those with overt hyperlipidemia.

Clinical Trial Registration— clinicaltrials.gov. Identifier NCT00239681.

Methods and Results— Individual patient data were obtained from the Hospital Episode Statistics. Statistical methods included multiple logistic regression models, mortality control charts, and safety plots to determine the nature of any relationship between volume and outcome. The case-mix between hospitals of different sizes was examined using observed and expected values for in-hospital mortality. Outcome measures included in-hospital mortality and hospital length of stay. Between 2005 and 2007, a total of 57 587 patients were admitted to hospitals in England with a diagnosis of AAA, and 11 574 underwent AAA repair. There were 7313 elective AAA repairs, of which 5668 (78%) were open and 1645 (22%) were EVR. In-hospital mortality rates were 5.63% for all elective AAA repairs with rates of 6.18% for open repair and 3.77% for EVR (odds ratio, 0.676; 95% CI, 0.501 to 0.913; P=0.011). High-volume aneurysm services were associated with significantly lower mortality rates overall (0.991; 0.988 to 0.994; P<0.0001), for open repairs (0.994; 0.991 to 0.998; P=0.0008), and EVR (0.989; 0.982 to 0.995; P=0.0007). Large endovascular units had low mortality rates for open repairs.

Conclusion— A strong relationship existed between the volume of surgery performed and outcome from both open and endovascular aneurysm repairs. These data support the concept that abdominal aortic surgery should be performed in specialized units that meet a minimum volume threshold.

Methods and Results— Treatment of 237 225 patients hospitalized with CAD was evaluated in the Get With the Guidelines–CAD program from 2002 to 2007. Six quality measures were evaluated in eligible patients without contraindications: aspirin on admission and discharge, β-blockers use at discharge, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor or angiotensin receptor antagonist use, lipid-lowering medication use, and tobacco cessation counseling along with other care metrics. Over time, composite adherence on these 6 measures increased from 86.5% to 97.4% (+10.9%) in men and 84.8% to 96.2% (+11.4%) in women. There was a slight difference in composite adherence by sex that remained significant over time (P<0.0001), but this was confined to patients <75 years. Composite adherence in younger patients (<75 years) increased from 87.1% to 97.7% (+10.6%) and from 83.0% to 95.1% (+12.1%) in the elderly (≥75 years) over time.

Conclusions— Among hospitals participating in Get With the Guidelines–CAD, guideline adherence has improved substantially over time for both women and men and younger and older CAD patients, with only slight age and sex differences in some measures persisting.

Methods and Results— The Western Canada Carotid Endarterectomy (WCCE) study (n=3164) was analyzed for outcomes by side along with data from the North American Symptomatic Carotid Endarterectomy Trial (NASCET; n=1415), and the ASA [Acetylsalicylic Acid] in Carotid Endarterectomy Trial (ACE; n=2469). Pooled analysis of individual-level data from these three studies allowed calculation of rate ratios for stroke or death by side. Medline and EMBASE were searched to identify additional studies reporting CE outcomes by side, and an overall risk ratio for outcomes by side was determined with fixed-effects meta-analysis. The WCCE in-hospital stroke or death rates for left and right-sided CE were 3.72% and 3.07%, respectively (P=0.27). A pooled analysis of the NASCET and ACE trials also revealed higher stroke or death rates for left-sided CE (5.39% versus 2.96%; P<0.001). The corresponding risk-adjusted rate ratios for stroke or death for left- versus right-sided surgery were 1.22 (95% CI, 0.83 to 1.77) for WCCE and 1.82 (1.32 to 2.50) for the pooled NASCET and ACE trials. Systematic review of the literature identified 2 additional studies. Meta-analysis of all 5 available studies yielded a corresponding pooled rate ratio for stroke or death of 1.36 (1.18 to 1.56).

Conclusions— Left-sided CE is consistently associated with higher postoperative adverse event rates. Research into potential mechanisms is required to explain and address this finding.

Methods and Results— STEMI patients presenting to the Minneapolis Heart Institute at Abbott Northwestern Hospital (Minneapolis, Minn) are tracked by 3 distinct quality assurance programs: NCDR, TJC, and the level 1 MI registry (a regional system for percutaneous coronary intervention in STEMI which includes transfer patients). Over 1 year, we examined consecutive STEMI patients in level 1 and compared them with individuals meeting NCDR and TJC inclusion criteria. Of 501 STEMI patients treated using the level 1 MI protocol, 422 patients had a clear culprit (402 percutaneous coronary intervention, 13 coronary artery bypass grafting, 7 medical management). In the same period, 282 patients met inclusion criteria for NCDR (56% of the level 1 population), and 66 met inclusion criteria for TJC (13% of the level 1 population). Transfer patients (n=380) accounted for 87% of the discrepancy between level 1 and TJC. Pharmacoinvasive percutaneous coronary intervention (n=102) accounted for 47% of the discrepancy between level 1 and NCDR.

Conclusions— Current inclusion criteria for enrollment in STEMI registries are not uniform. This may lead to variable quality assurance outcomes for the same patient cohort and has important implications for standardized quality measurement.

Methods and Results— MI was diagnosed with cardiac pain, biomarkers, and Minnesota coding of the ECG. Neutrophil count at presentation, reported as counts x10⁹/L, was categorized by tertiles (lower tertile, <5.7; middle tertile, 5.7 to 8.5; upper tertile, >8.5). From 1979 to 2002, 2047 incident MIs occurred in Olmsted County, Minn (mean age, 68±14 years; 44% women). Median (25th to 75th percentile) neutrophil count was 7.0 (5.1 to 9.5). Within 3 years post-MI, 577 patients died, and 770 developed HF. Overall survival and survival free of HF decreased with increased neutrophil tertile (P<0.001). Compared with the lower tertile, the age and sex adjusted hazard ratio for death was 1.44 (95% CI, 1.14 to 1.81) for the middle tertile and 2.60 (95% CI, 2.10 to 3.22) for the upper tertile (P<0.001). Similarly, for HF, the hazard ratio was 1.32 (95% CI, 1.09 to 1.59) for the middle and 2.12 (95% CI, 1.77 to 2.53) for the upper tertile (P<0.001). These associations persisted after adjustment for risk factors, comorbidities, Killip class, revascularization, and ejection fraction. Neutrophil count improved risk discrimination as indicated by increases in the area under the receiver operating characteristic curves (all P<0.05) and by the integrated discrimination improvement analysis (all P<0.001).

Conclusions— In the community, the neutrophil count was strongly and independently associated with death and HF post-MI and improved risk discrimination over traditional predictors.

Program— After a competitive application process, 4 AHA PRT Outcomes Research Centers were selected: Duke Clinical Research Institute; Saint Luke’s Mid America Heart Institute; Stanford University–Kaiser Permanente of Northern California; and University of California, Los Angeles. Each center proposed between 1 and 3 projects organized around a single theme in cardiovascular disease or stroke. Additionally, each center will select and train up to 6 postdoctoral fellows over the next 4 years, and will participate in cross-collaborative activities among the centers.

Conclusions— The AHA PRT Outcomes Research Centers Network is designed to further strengthen the field of cardiovascular disease and stroke outcomes research by fostering innovative research, supporting high quality training, and encouraging center-to-center collaborations.

Methods and Results— We computed 30-day incidence of stent thrombosis, need for repeat revascularization, and all-cause mortality for all PCIs performed at Tripler from January 2002 through June 2008. The New York State Registry regression model was selected among 3 risk-adjustment models that we assessed in our patients. This model was used to compute expected mortality rate based on patient risk factors. The 30-day incidence of stent thrombosis and repeat revascularization was also determined, and the long-term incidence of these events was estimated with the Kaplan–Meier method as was survival. For all 546 PCI procedures, 30-day mortality was 1.47%, the incidence of stent thrombosis 2.1%, the incidence of any repeat revascularization 5.1%, and the combined event rate 5.9%. Based on risk factors used in the New York State Registry, our expected mortality was 1.93% and not significantly different from the observed rate. Although survival at 1 and 3 years appeared comparable with benchmarks at 94.6% and 89.3%, as did repeat revascularization rates at 13.0% and 21.4%, the incidence of stent thrombosis was regarded as high whether the definition included possible cases (3.2% and 3.9%) or only those regarded as definite or probable (2.7% and 3.1%). We did not identify any remediable risk factors for stent thrombosis, nor were we able to identify significant differences by year or by operator. However, visual inspection of a plot of deciles of New York State risk of death demonstrated 2 outlier cases among the 8 who died, who could have been considered candidates for thorough peer review.

Conclusion— We recommend other low-volume interventional programs enter all patients undergoing PCI into a database, their own local registry even if not a national one such as the American College of Cardiology National Cardiovascular Data Registry, obtain information about survival and cardiac events during follow-up, compute and risk-adjust in-hospital or 30-day mortality, and use the objective assessment of risk in individual patients to identify outliers when outcome is adverse, and possibly as a means of triaging patients to appropriate therapy before choosing PCI.