scholarly journals Complete versus culprit-only percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome: a meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (Supplement_2) ◽  
Author(s):  
R Sakurai
Keyword(s):  
Myocardial Infarction ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Coronary Intervention ◽  
Coronary Revascularisation ◽  
St Segment Elevation ◽  
Coronary Syndrome ◽  
St Segment ◽  
Percutaneous Coronary ◽  
All Cause Mortality

Abstract Background The clinical benefit of complete or culprit-only percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS) still remains controversial. Purpose The purpose of this study was to investigate the clinical outcomes of complete or culprit-only PCI in patients with unstable angina and/or non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. Methods PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science were queried to conduct a meta-analysis. The same terms or relevant studies were also queried on the website of the U.S. National Institute of Health and relevant reviews. The primary endpoint was the incidence of major adverse cardiac events (MACE: the composite of all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, or coronary revascularisation) during follow-up period, and the secondary endpoints were the incidences of each component of MACE. When multiple follow-up results were reported in the same study, the latest results were abstracted. Pooled estimates were calculated using a random-effects model. Results Nine studies (60345 patients) were included in this meta-analysis. The risk of all-cause mortality (odds ratio (OR): 0.79, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.64–0.98, p=0.03) or coronary revascularisation (OR: 0.71, 95% CI: 0.50–1.00, p=0.05) were lower in the complete PCI group than in the culprit-only PCI group, whereas the risk of MACE (OR: 0.98, 95% CI: 0.65–1.49, p=0.94) or myocardial infarction (OR: 0.77, 95% CI: 0.54–1.08, p=0.13) was similar between the 2 groups. Conclusions In this meta-analysis, complete PCI is associated with a lower risk of all-cause mortality or coronary revascularisation, and a similar risk of MACE or myocardial infarction compared with culprit-only PCI in patients with NSTE-ACS. Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding source: None

Geriatric nutritional risk index is a predictor of recurrent percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with non-ST segment elevation myocardial infarction

Kardiologiia ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 61 (8) ◽  
pp. 60-67
Author(s):  
Mehmet Kaplan ◽  
Ertan Vuruskan ◽  
Gökhan Altunbas ◽  
Fethi Yavuz ◽  
Gizem Ilgın Kaplan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Myocardial Infarction ◽  
Percutaneous Coronary Intervention ◽  
Risk Group ◽  
Coronary Intervention ◽  
St Segment Elevation ◽  
Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction ◽  
St Segment ◽  
Percutaneous Coronary ◽  
All Cause Mortality

Aim To investigate the relationship between malnutrition and follow-up cardiovascular (CV) events in non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI).Material and methods A retrospective study was performed on 298 patients with NSTEMI. The baseline geriatric nutritionalrisk index (GNRI) was calculated at the first visit. The patients were divided into three groups accordingto the GNRI: >98, no-risk; 92 to ≤98, low risk; 82 to <92, moderate to high (MTH) risk. The studyendpoint was a composite of follow-up CV events, including all-cause mortality, non-valvular atrialfibrillation (NVAF), hospitalizations, and need for repeat percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).Results Follow-up data showed that MTH risk group had significantly higher incidence of repeat PCI and all-cause mortality compared to other groups (p<0.001). However, follow-up hospitalizations and NVAFwere similar between groups (p>0.05). The mean GNRI was 84.6 in patients needing repeat PCI and99.8 in patients who did not require repeat PCI (p<0.001). Kaplan Meier survival analysis showed thatpatients with MTH risk had significantly poorer survival (p<0.001). According to multivariate Coxregression analysis, theMTH risk group (hazard ratio=5.372) was associated with increased mortality.Conclusion GNRI value may have a potential role for the prediction of repeat PCI in patients with NSTEMI.

Outcomes of nonagenarians with acute coronary syndrome

2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (Supplement_2) ◽  
Author(s):  
J Echarte Morales ◽  
P.L Cepas Guillen ◽  
G Caldentey ◽  
E Martinez Gomez ◽  
J Borrego-Rodriguez ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Myocardial Infarction ◽  
High Risk Population ◽  
High Morbidity ◽  
Baseline Characteristic ◽  
Invasive Approach ◽  
St Segment Elevation ◽  
Coronary Syndrome ◽  
St Segment ◽  
All Cause Mortality

Abstract Background Myocardial infarction (MI) in nonagenarians is associated with high morbidity and mortality. Nonetheless, this population has typically been underrepresented in cardiovascular clinical trials. Objective The aim of this study was to evaluate outcomes of nonagenarian patients presenting with MI who underwent either conservative or invasive management. Methods We retrospectively included all consecutive patients equal to or older than 90yo admitted with non-ST segment elevation (NSTEMI) or ST segment elevation MI (STEMI) in four tertiary care centers between 2005 and 2018. Patients with type 2 myocardial infarction were excluded. We collected patients' baseline characteristic and procedural data. In-hospital and at 1-year follow-up all-cause mortality and major adverse cardiovascular events were assessed. Results 523 patients (mean age 92.6±2 years; 60% females) were analyzed. Overall, 184 patients (35.2%) underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), increasing over the years, mostly in STEMI group (from 16% of patients in 2005 to 75% in 2018). PCI was preferred in those subjects with less prevalence of disability for activities of daily living (p&lt;0.01). The use of a radial access (76.6%) and bare metal stents (52.7%) was predominant. No significant differences were found in the incidence of major bleeding events or MI-related mechanical complications between both strategies. During index hospitalization, 99 (18.9%) patients died. Whereas no differences were found in the NSTEMI group (p=0.61), a significant lower in-hospital mortality was observed in STEMI group treated with PCI (p&lt;0.01). At one-year follow up, 203 (38.8%) patients died, most of them due to a cardiovascular cause (60.6%). PCI was related to a lower all-cause mortality in either NSTEMI (p&lt;0.01) or STEMI groups (p&lt;0.01) however, lower cardiovascular mortality was only found in STEMI group (p=0.03). Conclusion An invasive approach was performed in over a third of nonagenarian patients, carrying prognostic implications and with a few numbers of complications. PCI seems to be the preferred strategy for STEMI in this high-risk population in spite of age. Figure 1 Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding source: None

scholarly journals Good Practices in the Clinical Management of Patients with Acute Coronary Syndrome: Retrospective Analysis in a Third-Level Hospital in Mexico

2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 ◽  
pp. 1-7
Author(s):  
Héctor E. Flores-Salinas ◽  
Fidel Casillas-Muñoz ◽  
Yeminia Valle ◽  
Cesar M. Guzmán-Sánchez ◽  
Jorge Ramon Padilla-Gutiérrez
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Myocardial Infarction ◽  
Percutaneous Coronary Intervention ◽  
Heart Surgery ◽  
Coronary Intervention ◽  
St Segment Elevation ◽  
Coronary Syndrome ◽  
Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction ◽  
St Segment ◽  
Percutaneous Coronary

Introduction and Objective. In Mexico, there has been an increase in the risk of cardiovascular disease due to rising life expectancy, westernized lifestyle, lack of prevention, and industrialized exposure. This article describes the pharmacological treatment, surgical interventions, and associated clinical complications in patients diagnosed with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and their impact on in-hospital mortality frequency in a Cardiology Unit in Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social. Methods. This is a retrospective study including male and female patients aged ≥18 years who were diagnosed with ACS. The collected data included demographic characteristics, risk factors, medications, electrocardiograms, surgical procedures, and in-hospital deaths. Results. There are at least 20% more diagnoses of ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction in this hospital compared to the latest national reports in Mexico. The most common risk factors were type 2 diabetes mellitus, hypertension, smoking, and dyslipidaemia. Diabetic patients with a clinical history of percutaneous coronary intervention had a higher risk of non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction than nondiabetics (OR: 2.34; p=0.013), also smoking patients with previous heart surgery than nonsmokers (OR: 7.73; p=0.0007). The average in-hospital mortality was 3.6% for ACS. Conclusions. There is a higher percentage of coronary interventionism and improvement in pharmacological treatment, which is reflected in lower mortality. The substantial burden of T2DM could be related to a higher number of cases of STEMI. Diabetics with precedent percutaneous coronary intervention and smokers with previous heart surgery have an increased risk of subsequent infarction.

scholarly journals Effects of ischaemic postconditioning on outcomes of patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction who underwent primary percutaneous coronary intervention: a meta-analysis

BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. e022509 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zhenhua Xing ◽  
Liang Tang ◽  
Jiabing Huang ◽  
Xiaofan Peng ◽  
Xinqun Hu
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Cardiac Death ◽  
Absolute Risk ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Coronary Intervention ◽  
St Segment Elevation ◽  
Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction ◽  
St Segment ◽  
Percutaneous Coronary ◽  
All Cause Mortality

ObjectiveThe aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the effects of ischaemic postconditioning (IPC) therapy on hard clinical endpoints in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients who underwent primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI).DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the effects of IPC on the outcomes of patients with STEMI.Data sourcesPubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Library were systematically searched for relevant articles published prior to May 1, 2018.Eligibility criteria for selecting studiesRandomised trials comparing conventional PPCI to PPCI combined with IPC in STEMI patients were included. The primary endpoint was heart failure. Secondary endpoints were all-cause mortality and major adverse cardiac events (MACE), including cardiac death, heart failure and MI. The Cochrane Reviewer’s Handbook 4.2 was used to assess the risk of bias.Data extraction and synthesisRelevant data were extracted by two independent investigators. We derived pooled risk ratios (RRs) with random effects models. Sensitivity and subgroup analyses were performed.ResultsTen studies that had enrolled 3137 patients were included. PPCI combined with IPC failed to reduce heart failure (RR: 0.88, 95% CI: 0.61 to 1.26, p=0.47; absolute risk: 3.64% in the IPC group and 4.11% in the PPCI only group), all-cause mortality (RR: 0.94, 95% CI: 0.69 to 1.27, p=0.68; absolute risk: 5.07% in the IPC group and 5.27% in the PPCI onlygroup), MACE (RR: 1.05, 95% CI: 0.83 to 1.32, p=0.69; absolute risk: 9.37% in the IPC group and 8.93% in the PPCI only group), cardiac death (RR: 1.28, 95% CI: 0.85 to 1.93, p=0.24; absolute risk: 4.28% in the IPC group and 3.25% in the PPCI only group) and MI (RR: 1.08, 95% CI: 0.38 to 3.12, p=0.88; absolute risk: 3.61% in the IPC group and 3.44% in the PPCI only group).ConclusionsIPC combined with PPCI does not reduce heart failure, MACE and all-cause mortality compared with traditional PPCI in patients with STEMI.Trial registration numberCRD42017063959

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document