American Heart Journal
Volume 155, Issue 1 , Pages 42-48 , January 2008

Comparing invasive and noninvasive management strategies for acute myocardial infarction using administrative databases

  • Louise Pilote, MD, MPH, PhD

      Affiliations

    • Division of Clinical Epidemiology, McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
    • Corresponding Author InformationReprint requests: Louise Pilote, MD, MPH, PhD, Division of Clinical Epidemiology, McGill University Health Centre, 687 Pine Avenue West, Montreal, Quebec, Canada H3A 1A1.
    • ,
  • Christine A. Beck, MD, MSc

      Affiliations

    • Division of Clinical Epidemiology, McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
    • ,
  • Mark J. Eisenberg, MD, MPH

      Affiliations

    • Divisions of Cardiology and Clinical Epidemiology, Sir Mortimer B. Davis–Jewish General Hospital, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
    • ,
  • Karin Humphries, MBA, DSc

      Affiliations

    • University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
    • ,
  • Lawrence Joseph, PhD

      Affiliations

    • Division of Clinical Epidemiology, McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
    • ,
  • John R. Penrod, PhD

      Affiliations

    • Division of Clinical Epidemiology, McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
    • ,
  • Jack V. Tu, MD, PhD

      Affiliations

    • Institute for Clinical and Evaluative Sciences, Sunnybrook and Women's College Health Science Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada

Received 4 April 2007 ,Accepted 9 September 2007.

References 

  1. Simoons M, Arnold A, Betriu A, et al. Thrombolysis with tissue plasminogen activator in acute myocardial infarction: no additional benefit from immediate percutaneous coronary angioplasty. Lancet. 1988;1:197–203
  2. Barbash G, Roth AHH, Modan M, et al. Randomized controlled trial of late in-hospital angiography and angioplasty versus conservative management after treatment with recombinant tissue-type plasminogen activator in acute myocardial infarction. Am J Cardiol. 1990;66:538–545
  3. SWIFT Trial Study Group. SWIFT trial of delayed elective intervention vs conservative treatment after thrombolysis with anistreplase in acute myocardial infarction. Br Med J. 1991;302:555–560
  4. Williams D, Braunwald E, Knatterud G, et al. One-year results of the Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction Investigation (TIMI) phase II trial. Circulation. 1992;85:533–542
  5. Anderson H, Cannon C, Stone P, et al. One-year results of the thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI IIIB) clinical trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1995;26:1643–1650
  6. Boden W, O'Rourke R, Crawford M, et al. Outcomes in patients with acute non–Q wave myocardial infarction randomly assigned to an invasive as compared with a conservative management strategy. N Engl J Med. 1998;338:1785–1792
  7. Mark D, Naylor C, Hlatky M, et al. Medical resource and quality of life outcomes following acute myocardial infarction in Canada versus the United States: the Canadian–U.S. GUSTO substudy. N Engl J Med. 1994;331:1130–1135
  8. Heidenreich PA, McClellan M. Trends in treatment and outcomes for acute myocardial infarction: 1975-1995. Am J Med. 2001;110:165–174
  9. Pilote L, Lavoie F, Ho V, et al. Changes in the treatment and outcomes of acute myocardial infarction in Quebec, 1988-1995. Can Med Assoc J. 2000;163:31–36
  10. Byar D. Problems with using observational databases to compare treatments. Stat Med. 1991;10:663–666
  11. Newhouse JP, McClellan M. Econometrics in outcomes research: the use of instrumental variables. Annu Rev Public Health. 1998;19:17–34
  12. Zohoori N, Savitz D. Econometric approaches to epidemiologic data: relating endogeneity and unobserved heterogeneity to confounding. Ann Epidemiol. 1997;7:251–257
  13. McClellan M, McNeil BJ, Newhouse JP. Does more intensive treatment of acute myocardial infarction in the elderly reduce mortality?. JAMA. 1994;272:859–866
  14. McClellan M. Are the returns to technological change in health care declining?. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1996;93:12701–12708
  15. Beck C, Penrod J, Gyorkos T, et al. Does aggressive care following acute myocardial infarction reduce mortality? Analysis with instrumental variables to compare effectiveness in Canadian and United States patient populations. Health Serv Res. 2003;38:1423–1440
  16. Harris K, Remler D. Who is the marginal patient? Understanding instrumental variables estimates of treatment effects. Health Serv Res. 1998;33:1337–1360
  17. Giugliano R, Llevadot J, Wilcox R, et al. Geographic variation in patient and hospital characteristics, management, and clinical outcomes in ST-elevation myocardial infarction treated with fibrinolysis, Results from InTIME-II. Eur Heart J. 2001;22:1702–1715
  18. Pilote L, Saynina O, Lavoie F, et al. Cardiac procedures use and outcomes in elderly patients with acute myocardial infarction in the United States and Quebec, Canada, 1988 to 1994. Med Care. 2003;41:813–822
  19. Gupta M, Chang W, Van der Werf F, et al. International differences in in-hospital revascularization and outcomes following acute myocardial infarction: a multilevel analysis of patients in ASSENT-2. Eur Heart J. 2003;24:1640–1650
  20. Levy A, Tamblyn RM, Fitchett D, et al. Coding accuracy of hospital discharge data for elderly survivors of myocardial infarction. Can J Cardiol. 1999;15:1277–1282
  21. Austin PC, Daly PA, Tu JV. A multicenter study of the coding accuracy of hospital discharge administrative data for patients admitted to cardiac care units in Ontario. Am Heart J. 2002;144:290–296
  22. Tu J, Naylor D, Austin P. Temporal changes in the outcomes of acute myocardial infarction in Ontario, 1992-1996. Can Med Assoc J. 1999;161:1257–1261
  23. Ghahramani M, Dean C, Spinelli J. Simultaneous modelling of operative mortality and long-term survival after coronary artery bypass surgery. Stat Med. 2001;20:1931–1945
  24. Kass R, Raftery A. Bayes factors. J Am Stat Assoc. 1995;50:773–795
  25. Deaton A. In: Econometric issues for survey data, the analysis of household surveys: a microeconomic approach to development policy. John Hopkins University Press; 1997;p. 91–117
  26. Herlitz J, McGovern P, Dellborg M, et al. Comparison of treatment and outcomes for patients with acute myocardial infarction in Minneapolis/St. Paul, Minnesota, and Goteborg, Sweden. Am Heart J. 2003;146:1023–1029
  27. Stukel TA, Fisher ES, Wennberg DE, et al. Analysis of observational studies in the presence of treatment selection bias: effects of invasive cardiac management on AMI survival using propensity score and instrumental variable methods. JAMA. 2007;297:278–285

PII: S0002-8703(07)00829-0

doi: 10.1016/j.ahj.2007.09.016

American Heart Journal
Volume 155, Issue 1 , Pages 42-48 , January 2008

Article Tools