scholarly journals Routine invasive management after fibrinolysis in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction: a systematic review of randomized clinical trials

2011 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter Bogaty ◽  
Kristian B Filion ◽  
James M Brophy
2021 ◽  
Vol 42 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
L Oliveira ◽  
C Machado ◽  
C Almeida ◽  
M Fatima Loureiro ◽  
D Martins ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Current European Society of Cardiology guidelines recommend an invasive strategy (IS) for the treatment of non-ST elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) patients, but the clinical trials that support this recommendations included only a few patients with previous coronary artery bypass graft (CABG). Purpose To characterize NSTEMI patients with previous CABG who underwent medical and invasive management and to evaluate the prognostic impact of the type of strategy used. Methods Retrospective analysis of a cohort of patients from a multicenter national registry diagnosed with NSTEMI with a previous history of CABG between 2010 and 2021. Patient's baseline demographics, medical history and in-hospital management data was collected. Outcomes of in-hospital and six months follow-up all-cause mortality were accessed. Results A total of 890 patients were included in the analysis. Of these, 470 were medically managed (MM) – this group included 249 patients (53.1%) who underwent coronary angiography but did not perform any further revascularization. The remaining 420 underwent an invasive strategy (IS) and performed additional revascularization, mainly percutaneous (only 1 patient submitted to reCABG). Mean age was similar (MM 72±10 vs IS 71±10 years, p=0.147) and most patients were male (MM 81.5% vs IS 83.8%, p=0.362). MM patients had more chronic kidney disease (16.7% vs 9.9%, p=0.003), peripheral artery disease (20.5% vs 15.0%, p=0.003) and heart failure (20.5% vs 11.9%, p<0.001). Main presenting symptom was chest pain in both groups, however it was more frequent in the IS group (89.4% vs 94.5%, p=0.006) and dyspnea in the MM patients (6.3% vs 3.1%). Mean left ventricle ejection fraction was similar between groups (MM 49±12% vs IS 50±11%, p=0.290). Although the GRACE risk score was available for only 124 patients, high risk patients (GRACE score >140) were equally distributed among the two groups (55.9% vs 48.2%, p=0.395). An IS was associated with significant lower in-hospital mortality (4.5% vs 1.7%, OR 0.37, 95% CI 0.15–0.87, p=0.018). At six months follow-up an IS was also associated with lower mortality (6.6% vs 2.4%, HR 0.18, 95% CI 0.06–0.52, p=0.002), even after adjusting for the baseline differences (HR 0.41, 95% CI 0.20–0.85, p=0.016). Conclusions In this cohort of patients with NSTEMI and previous CABG, an IS was linked to better outcomes during hospitalization and during six months follow-up. Randomized clinical trials are needed to address this issue. FUNDunding Acknowledgement Type of funding sources: None.


2019 ◽  
Vol 208 ◽  
pp. 21-27
Author(s):  
Christoffer Polcwiartek ◽  
Pia Behrndtz ◽  
Ann Hass Andersen ◽  
Marianne Bregendahl ◽  
Helle Pedersen Hald ◽  
...  

Circulation ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 142 (Suppl_3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexander Ivanov ◽  
Bharat Ravishankar ◽  
Rishi Thaker ◽  
rachit marwaha ◽  
Issa Kutkut

Background: Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (PCI) is the preferred treatment for patients presenting with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). Despite multiple randomized clinical trials (RCT) best revascularization strategy (RS) in patients with STEMI and multivessel disease (MVD) remains unknown. We aimed to use network meta-analysis to compare currently used approaches. Methods: We searched for RCT comparing RSs in patients with MVD undergoing PCI for STEMI. We identified and compared RCT with arms evaluating at least two of the following approaches: culprit only revascularization (CoR), complete revascularization during initial intervention (CR) and staged procedure with culprit vessel revascularization followed by non culprit significant lesions intervention during the initial hospitalization. Our primary outcome was all-cause mortality. We combined direct and indirect data to perform a network meta-analysis. Results: A total of 7,779 patients from 13 RCT were included in this analysis (Fig. 1). Overall, this is an unbalanced network with only 1 arm comparing CR and SR. Complete revascularization during initial procedure was associated with a significant reduction in mortality with RR 0.47 (0.34; 0.65), p<0.01, when compared to culprit only approach. There was a higher risk of mortality associated with SR, when compared to CR, with RR 1.9 (1.29; 2.82), p<0.01. There was no mortality risk difference between CoR and SR, RR 0.89 (0.72,1.11), p>0.5 (Fig. 2). There was no evidence of a model inconsistency in an overall comparison, p>0.21. There was a design by treatment interaction in SR vs CoR comparison, p<0.01. Conclusion: Complete revascularization during primary PCI in patients presenting with STEMI and MVD was associated with significant mortality reduction when compared to culprit only lesion revascularization. There may be design by treatment interaction limiting comparison of staged and culprit only strategies.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document