title: Patient satisfaction is comparable to early discharge versus overnight observation after elective percutaneous coronary intervention.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Previous investigation has suggested that early discharge after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is feasible and safe, but these studies have utilized largely radial approaches or been conducted in non-U.S. cohorts. We sought to assess patient satisfaction, safety and cost of a strategy of selective early discharge in U.S. patients undergoing PCI via a femoral approach with contemporary adjunctive pharmacologic and hemostasis agents.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Patients with stable coronary artery disease undergoing elective PCI were prospectively recruited and randomized to either routine care, with an overnight hospital stay, versus early discharge 2 hours following successful PCI with adjunctive bivalirudin therapy and a femoral arterial closure device at the end of the procedure. The primary endpoints were safety and patient satisfaction as measured by a validated patient satisfaction survey during the index hospital stay and at 30 days. A total of 39 patients were randomized, with 20 to routine care and 19 to early discharge. There was no difference in major safety endpoints including death, non-fatal MI, urgent target lesion revascularization and thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI) major bleeding, with none in either group. Mean patient satisfaction scores were similar and high in both groups (89.6 for early discharge patients and 90.7 for routine care patients, p = 0.68). There was lower cost in the early discharge group, with a mean cost of 8,604 USD versus 10,565 USD in the routine care group (mean difference 1,961 USD, 95% confidence interval, -96 USD to 4,017 USD).
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Patients undergoing elective PCI for stable coronary artery disease may have similar safety and satisfaction with early discharge when using a careful strategy that incorporates optimal stent and hemostasis results and contemporary adjunctive anticoagulation therapy, with lower cost. This strategy may serve as a basis for a larger-scale randomized trial.
authors.affiliation: Cardiology Consultants, Pennsylvania, Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, Christiana Hospital, Newark, Delaware, USA. ruglaser@gmail.com
authors.forename: Ruchira
authors.initials: R
authors.lastname: Glaser
authors.forename: Zachary
authors.initials: Z
authors.lastname: Gertz
authors.forename: William H
authors.initials: WH
authors.lastname: Matthai
authors.forename: Robert L
authors.initials: RL
authors.lastname: Wilensky
authors.forename: Mark
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Weiner
authors.forename: Daniel
authors.initials: D
authors.lastname: Kolansky
authors.forename: John
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Hirshfeld
authors.forename: Howard
authors.initials: H
authors.lastname: Herrmann
mesh_terms: D015906:Angioplasty, Balloon, Coronary; D003324:Coronary Artery Disease / Q000628:therapy*; D003362:Cost-Benefit Analysis; D005260:Female; D005500:Follow-Up Studies; D006306:Health Surveys; D006801:Humans; D007902:Length of Stay; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D009203:Myocardial Infarction / Q000628:therapy*; D010351:Patient Discharge / Q000191:economics; D017060:Patient Satisfaction; D010865:Pilot Projects; D011446:Prospective Studies; D012189:Retrospective Studies; D011795:Surveys and Questionnaires; D013997:Time Factors