Publication Date
2-1-2020
Journal
International Journal of Cardiology
DOI
10.1016/j.ijcard.2019.09.016
PMID
31611091
PMCID
PMC7924730
PubMedCentral® Posted Date
3-2-2021
PubMedCentral® Full Text Version
Author MSS
Published Open-Access
yes
Keywords
Cardiovascular Diseases, Humans, Mortality, Myocardial Infarction, Neoplasms, Percutaneous Coronary Intervention, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Treatment Outcome, Cancer, Percutaneous coronary intervention, Mortality, Outcomes, Drug eluding stent, Meta-analysis
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Randomized clinical trials demonstrated the benefits of percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) in diverse clinical settings. Patients with cancer were not routinely included in these studies.
METHODS/RESULTS: Literature search of PubMed, Cochrane, Medline, SCOPUS, EMBASE, and ClinicalTrials was conducted to identify studies that assessed one-year all-cause, cardiovascular and non-cardiovascular mortality in patients with historical or active cancer. Using the random effects model, we computed risk ratios (RRs) and standardized mean differences and their 95% confidence intervals for the dichotomous and continuous measures and outcomes, respectively. Of 171 articles evaluated in total, 5 eligible studies were included in this meta-analysis. In total, 33,175 patients receiving PCI were analyzed, of whom 3323 patients had cancer and 29,852 no cancer history. Patients in the cancer group had greater all-cause mortality [RR 2.22 (1.51-3.26; p
CONCLUSIONS: Patients with cancer undergoing PCI have worse mid-term outcomes compared to non-cancer patients. Cancer patients should be managed by a multi-specialist team, in an effort to close the mortality gap.
Included in
Cardiology Commons, Cardiovascular Diseases Commons, Medical Sciences Commons, Oncology Commons
