Heart and Vessels

, Volume 34, Issue 1, pp 33–43 | Cite as

Follow-up tests and outcomes for patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: analysis of a Japanese administrative database

  • Tomotsugu Seki
  • Masato Takeuchi
  • Ryusuke Miki
  • Koji KawakamiEmail author
Original Article


Follow-up tests after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) are considered inappropriate for asymptomatic patients. Despite this perception, many cardiologists conduct follow-up tests as routine practice. The objective of this study was to investigate the survival benefits of follow-up testing after PCI in a real-world setting in Japan. A nationwide Japanese administrative database was used to identify unselected patients who underwent PCI with stent implantation between January 2010 and December 2013. We used time-dependent Cox proportional hazards models to evaluate the association between follow-up testing and outcomes. The primary outcome was the composite of all-cause death and acute myocardial infarction (AMI). Among a total of 21,409 patients, 15,095 (70.5%) completed follow-up testing, of whom 9814 (45.0%) underwent coronary angiography. During a median of 2.7 years of observation, the primary outcome occurred less frequently for patients who underwent follow-up testing (1.21 vs. 4.51% per year; adjusted hazard ratio, 0.59; 95% CI 0.52–0.67; p < 0.001). Individual rates of all-cause death and AMI were also lower for the patients who underwent follow-up testing. Follow-up testing was associated with a lower risk of all-cause death and/or AMI. However, because of the unexpectedly large effect and many limitations of the administrative data, our findings should be further investigated to assess the net benefit of follow-up tests. In addition, we do not intend to encourage routine follow-up tests for patients without clear clinical indications. Follow-up tests should be conducted in accordance with clinical indications.


Coronary artery disease Stress test Coronary angiography Percutaneous coronary intervention 



We thank Mr. Masaki Nakamura, Medical Data Vision Co., Ltd., for generous provision of the claims data.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflicts of interest

Dr. Kawakami received honoraria from Astellas, Eisai, Abbie, Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited, Novartis KK, Santen, Bayer Yakuhin, Sanofi K.K., Kyowa Hakko Kirin, and Otsuka Pharmaceutical and consult fees from Olympus and Kaken Pharmaceutical. There are no patents, products in development, or marketed products to declare that are relevant to those companies. Other authors: None declared.

Research involving human participants and/or animals

The present study was approved by the Ethics Committee of Kyoto University Graduate School of Medicine (R0705).

Informed consent

Because all data were anonymized, the requirement for informed consent was waived.

Supplementary material

380_2018_1224_MOESM1_ESM.docx (59 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 58 kb)


  1. 1.
    Stefanini GG, Holmes DR Jr (2013) Drug-eluting coronary-artery stents. N Engl J Med 368:254–265CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Mudrick DW, Shah BR, McCoy LA, Lytle BL, Masoudi FA, Federspiel JJ, Cowper PA, Green C, Douglas PS (2013) Patterns of stress testing and diagnostic catheterization after coronary stenting in 250 350 Medicare beneficiaries. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging 6:11–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Uchida T, Popma J, Stone GW, Ellis SG, Turco MA, Ormiston JA, Muramatsu T, Nakamura M, Nanto S, Yokoi H, Baim DS (2010) The clinical impact of routine angiographic follow-up in randomized trials of drug-eluting stents: a critical assessment of “oculostenotic” reintervention in patients with intermediate lesions. JACC Cardiovasc Interv 3:403–411CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Lansky AJ, Brar SS, Yaqub M, Sood P, Applegate RJ, Lazar D, Jankovic I, Hermiller JB, Koo K, Sudhir K, Stone GW (2012) Impact of routine angiographic follow-up after percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stents in the SPIRIT III randomized trial at 3 years. Am J Cardiol 110:21–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Mindrescu C, Brener SJ, Guerchicoff A, Fahy M, Parise H, Mehran R, Stone GW (2013) Impact of scheduled angiographic follow-up in patients treated with primary percutaneous coronary intervention for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. J Interv Cardiol 26:319–324CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Fihn SD, Gardin JM, Abrams J, Berra K, Blankenship JC, Dallas AP, Douglas PS, Foody JM, Gerber TC, Hinderliter AL, King SB 3rd, Kligfield PD, Krumholz HM, Kwong RY, Lim MJ, Linderbaum JA, Mack MJ, Munger MA, Prager RL, Sabik JF, Shaw LJ, Sikkema JD, Smith CR Jr, Smith SC Jr, Spertus JA, Williams SV, American College of Cardiology F (2012) 2012 ACCF/AHA/ACP/AATS/PCNA/SCAI/STS guideline for the diagnosis and management of patients with stable ischemic heart disease: executive summary: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association task force on practice guidelines, and the American College of Physicians, American Association for Thoracic Surgery, Preventive Cardiovascular Nurses Association, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, and Society of Thoracic Surgeons. Circulation 126:3097–3137CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Wolk MJ, Bailey SR, Doherty JU, Douglas PS, Hendel RC, Kramer CM, Min JK, Patel MR, Rosenbaum L, Shaw LJ, Stainback RF, Allen JM (2014) ACCF/AHA/ASE/ASNC/HFSA/HRS/SCAI/SCCT/SCMR/STS 2013 multimodality appropriate use criteria for the detection and risk assessment of stable ischemic heart disease: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation Appropriate Use Criteria Task Force, American Heart Association, American Society of Echocardiography, American Society of Nuclear Cardiology, Heart Failure Society of America, Heart Rhythm Society, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography, Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance, and Society of Thoracic Surgeons. J Am Coll Cardiol 63:380–406CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Misumida N, Aoi S, Saeed M, Ota T, Eda T, Umeda H, Kanei Y (2016) The role of angiographic follow-up after percutaneous coronary intervention. Int J Cardiol 222:911–920CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Beller GA (2010) Stress testing after coronary revascularization too much, too soon. J Am Coll Cardiol 56:1335–1337CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Harb SC, Marwick TH (2014) Prognostic value of stress imaging after revascularization: a systematic review of stress echocardiography and stress nuclear imaging. Am Heart J 167:77–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Cassese S, Byrne RA, Schulz S, Hoppman P, Kreutzer J, Feuchtenberger A, Ibrahim T, Ott I, Fusaro M, Schunkert H, Laugwitz KL, Kastrati A (2015) Prognostic role of restenosis in 10 004 patients undergoing routine control angiography after coronary stenting. Eur Heart J 36:94–99CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Urushihara H, Taketsuna M, Liu Y, Oda E, Nakamura M, Nishiuma S, Maeda R (2012) Increased risk of acute pancreatitis in patients with type 2 diabetes: an observational study using a Japanese hospital database. PLoS One 7:e53224CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kanazawa Y, Takeuchi M, Tateya I, Omori K, Kawakami K (2017) Clinical epidemiology of tracheal invasion from thyroid cancer in Japanese population: functional outcomes and effect of aging. Cancer Epidemiol 50:107–112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Shah BR, Cowper PA, O’Brien SM, Jensen N, Drawz M, Patel MR, Douglas PS, Peterson ED (2010) Patterns of cardiac stress testing after revascularization in community practice. J Am Coll Cardiol 56:1328–1334CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Quan H, Li B, Couris CM, Fushimi K, Graham P, Hider P, Januel J-M, Sundararajan V (2011) Updating and validating the Charlson Comorbidity index and score for risk adjustment in hospital discharge abstracts using data from six countries. Am J Epidemiol 173:676–682CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Yamana H, Moriwaki M, Horiguchi H, Kodan M, Fushimi K, Yasunaga H (2017) Validity of diagnoses, procedures, and laboratory data in Japanese administrative data. J Epidemiol 27:476–482CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Yamada K, Yasunaga H, Kadono Y, Chikuda H, Ogata T, Horiguchi H, Tanaka S (2016) Postoperative outcomes of major lower extremity amputations in patients with diabetes and peripheral artery disease: analysis using the diagnosis procedure combination database in Japan. Am J Surg 212:446–450CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Suissa S (2008) Immortal time bias in pharmaco-epidemiology. Am J Epidemiol 167:492–499CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Sterne JA, White IR, Carlin JB, Spratt M, Royston P, Kenward MG, Wood AM, Carpenter JR (2009) Multiple imputation for missing data in epidemiological and clinical research: potential and pitfalls. BMJ 338:b2393CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    He Y (2010) Missing data analysis using multiple imputation: getting to the heart of the matter. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes 3:98–105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Task Force M, Montalescot G, Sechtem U, Achenbach S, Andreotti F, Arden C, Budaj A, Bugiardini R, Crea F, Cuisset T, Di Mario C, Ferreira JR, Gersh BJ, Gitt AK, Hulot JS, Marx N, Opie LH, Pfisterer M, Prescott E, Ruschitzka F, Sabate M, Senior R, Taggart DP, van der Wall EE, Vrints CJ, Zamorano JL, Achenbach S, Baumgartner H, Bax JJ, Bueno H, Dean V, Deaton C, Erol C, Fagard R, Ferrari R, Hasdai D, Hoes AW, Kirchhof P, Knuuti J, Kolh P, Lancellotti P, Linhart A, Nihoyannopoulos P, Piepoli MF, Ponikowski P, Sirnes PA, Tamargo JL, Tendera M, Torbicki A, Wijns W, Windecker S, Knuuti J, Valgimigli M, Bueno H, Claeys MJ, Donner-Banzhoff N, Erol C, Frank H, Funck-Brentano C, Gaemperli O, Gonzalez-Juanatey JR, Hamilos M, Hasdai D, Husted S, James SK, Kervinen K, Kolh P, Kristensen SD, Lancellotti P, Maggioni AP, Piepoli MF, Pries AR, Romeo F, Ryden L, Simoons ML, Sirnes PA, Steg PG, Timmis A, Wijns W, Windecker S, Yildirir A, Zamorano JL (2013) 2013 ESC guidelines on the management of stable coronary artery disease: the Task Force on the management of stable coronary artery disease of the European Society of Cardiology. Eur Heart J 34:2949–3003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Group JCSJW (2013) Guidelines for elective percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with stable coronary artery disease (JCS 2011) Published in 2012. Circ J 77:1590–1607CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Shiomi H, Morimoto T, Kitaguchi S, Nakagawa Y, Ishii K, Haruna Y, Takamisawa I, Motooka M, Nakao K, Matsuda S, Mimoto S, Aoyama Y, Takeda T, Murata K, Akao M, Inada T, Eizawa H, Hyakuna E, Awano K, Shirotani M, Furukawa Y, Kadota K, Miyauchi K, Tanaka M, Noguchi Y, Nakamura S, Yasuda S, Miyazaki S, Daida H, Kimura K, Ikari Y, Hirayama H, Sumiyoshi T, Kimura T (2017) The ReACT trial: randomized evaluation of routine follow-up coronary angiography after percutaneous coronary intervention trial. JACC Cardiovasc Interv 10:109–117CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Boden WE, O’Rourke RA, Teo KK, Hartigan PM, Maron DJ, Kostuk WJ, Knudtson M, Dada M, Casperson P, Harris CL, Chaitman BR, Shaw L, Gosselin G, Nawaz S, Title LM, Gau G, Blaustein AS, Booth DC, Bates ER, Spertus JA, Berman DS, Mancini GB, Weintraub WS (2007) Optimal medical therapy with or without PCI for stable coronary disease. N Engl J Med 356:1503–1516CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Stergiopoulos K, Boden WE, Hartigan P, Mobius-Winkler S, Hambrecht R, Hueb W, Hardison RM, Abbott JD, Brown DL (2014) Percutaneous coronary intervention outcomes in patients with stable obstructive coronary artery disease and myocardial ischemia: a collaborative meta-analysis of contemporary randomized clinical trials. JAMA Intern Med 174:232–240CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Misumida N, Kobayashi A, Kim SM, Abdel-Latif A, Ziada KM (2017) Role of routine follow-up coronary angiography after percutaneous coronary intervention—systematic review and meta-analysis. Circ J 82:203–210CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    McAlister FA (2011) The end of the risk-treatment paradox? A rising tide lifts all boats. J Am Coll Cardiol 58:1766–1767CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Avins AL, Pressman A, Ackerson L, Rudd P, Neuhaus J, Vittinghoff E (2010) Placebo adherence and its association with morbidity and mortality in the studies of left ventricular dysfunction. J Gen Intern Med 25:1275–1281CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Mencel G, Kowalczyk J, Lenarczyk R, Chodor P, Was T, Swierad M, Honisz G, Swiatkowski A, Wozniak A, Kalarus Z, Sredniawa B (2016) The impact of routine angiographic follow-up in a population of patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention within the left main coronary artery. Angiology 67:742–748CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Toyota T, Morimoto T, Shiomi H, Ando K, Ono K, Shizuta S, Kato T, Saito N, Furukawa Y, Nakagawa Y, Horie M, Kimura T (2017) Ad hoc vs. non-ad hoc percutaneous coronary intervention strategies in patients with stable coronary artery disease. Circ J 81:458–467CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Ooba N, Setoguchi S, Ando T, Sato T, Yamaguchi T, Mochizuki M, Kubota K (2013) Claims-based definition of death in Japanese claims database: validity and implications. PLoS One 8:e66116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Dehmer GJ, Weaver D, Roe MT, Milford-Beland S, Fitzgerald S, Hermann A, Messenger J, Moussa I, Garratt K, Rumsfeld J, Brindis RG (2012) A contemporary view of diagnostic cardiac catheterization and percutaneous coronary intervention in the United States: a report from the CathPCI Registry of the national cardiovascular data registry, 2010 through June 2011. J Am Coll Cardiol 60:2017–2031CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Japan KK, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Pharmacoepidemiology, Graduate School of Medicine and PublicHealth Kyoto UniversityKyotoJapan

Personalised recommendations