Cargando…
Comparison of outcomes in ST-segment depression and ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction patients treated with emergency PCI: data from a multicentre registry
BACKGROUND: Traditionally, acute myocardial infarction (AMI) has been described as either STEMI (ST-elevation myocardial infarction) or non-STEMI myocardial infarction. This classification is historically related to the use of thrombolytic therapy, which is effective in STEMI. The current era of wid...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Clinics Cardive Publishing
2012
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3721943/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23108517 http://dx.doi.org/10.5830/CVJA-2012-053 |
_version_ | 1782278113743339520 |
---|---|
author | Knot, Jiri Rohac, Fili P Petr, Robert Bil Kova, Dana Widimsky, Petr Bělohlavek, Jan Kala, Petr Rokyta, Richard Stasek, Josef Kuzmanov, Boyko Djambazov, Slavejko Grigorov, Mladen Nomaz, Ota Hli |
author_facet | Knot, Jiri Rohac, Fili P Petr, Robert Bil Kova, Dana Widimsky, Petr Bělohlavek, Jan Kala, Petr Rokyta, Richard Stasek, Josef Kuzmanov, Boyko Djambazov, Slavejko Grigorov, Mladen Nomaz, Ota Hli |
author_sort | Knot, Jiri |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Traditionally, acute myocardial infarction (AMI) has been described as either STEMI (ST-elevation myocardial infarction) or non-STEMI myocardial infarction. This classification is historically related to the use of thrombolytic therapy, which is effective in STEMI. The current era of widespread use of coronary angiography (CAG), usually followed by primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) puts this classification system into question. OBJECTIVES: To compare the outcomes of patients with STEMI and ST-depression myocardial infarction (STDMI) who were treated with emergency PCI. METHODS: This multicentre registry enrolled a total of 6 602 consecutive patients with AMI. Patients were divided into the following subgroups: STEMI (n = 3446), STDMI (n = 907), left bundle branch block (LBBB) AMI (n = 241), right bundle branch block (RBBB) AMI (n = 338) and other electrocardiographic (ECG) AMI (n = 1670). Baseline and angiographic characteristics were studied, and revascularisation therapies and in-hospital mortality were analysed. RESULTS: Acute heart failure was present in 29.5% of the STDMI vs 27.4% of the STEMI patients (p < 0.001). STDMI patients had more extensive coronary atherosclerosis than patients with STEMI (three-vessel disease: 53.1 vs 30%, p < 0.001). The left main coronary artery was an infract-related artery (IRA) in 6.0% of STDMI vs 1.1% of STEMI patients (p < 0.001). TIMI flow 0–1 was found in 35.0% of STDMI vs 66.0% of STEMI patients (p < 0.001). Primary PCI was performed in 88.1% of STEMI (with a success rate of 90.8%) vs 61.8% of STDMI patients (with a success rate of 94.5%) (p = 0.012 for PCI success rates). In-hospital mortality was not significantly different (STDMI 6.3 vs STEMI 5.4%, p = 0.330). CONCLUSION: These data suggest that similar strategies (emergency CAG with PCI whenever feasible) should be applied to both these types of AMI. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-3721943 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2012 |
publisher | Clinics Cardive Publishing |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-37219432013-08-07 Comparison of outcomes in ST-segment depression and ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction patients treated with emergency PCI: data from a multicentre registry Knot, Jiri Rohac, Fili P Petr, Robert Bil Kova, Dana Widimsky, Petr Bělohlavek, Jan Kala, Petr Rokyta, Richard Stasek, Josef Kuzmanov, Boyko Djambazov, Slavejko Grigorov, Mladen Nomaz, Ota Hli Cardiovasc J Afr Cardiovascular Topics BACKGROUND: Traditionally, acute myocardial infarction (AMI) has been described as either STEMI (ST-elevation myocardial infarction) or non-STEMI myocardial infarction. This classification is historically related to the use of thrombolytic therapy, which is effective in STEMI. The current era of widespread use of coronary angiography (CAG), usually followed by primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) puts this classification system into question. OBJECTIVES: To compare the outcomes of patients with STEMI and ST-depression myocardial infarction (STDMI) who were treated with emergency PCI. METHODS: This multicentre registry enrolled a total of 6 602 consecutive patients with AMI. Patients were divided into the following subgroups: STEMI (n = 3446), STDMI (n = 907), left bundle branch block (LBBB) AMI (n = 241), right bundle branch block (RBBB) AMI (n = 338) and other electrocardiographic (ECG) AMI (n = 1670). Baseline and angiographic characteristics were studied, and revascularisation therapies and in-hospital mortality were analysed. RESULTS: Acute heart failure was present in 29.5% of the STDMI vs 27.4% of the STEMI patients (p < 0.001). STDMI patients had more extensive coronary atherosclerosis than patients with STEMI (three-vessel disease: 53.1 vs 30%, p < 0.001). The left main coronary artery was an infract-related artery (IRA) in 6.0% of STDMI vs 1.1% of STEMI patients (p < 0.001). TIMI flow 0–1 was found in 35.0% of STDMI vs 66.0% of STEMI patients (p < 0.001). Primary PCI was performed in 88.1% of STEMI (with a success rate of 90.8%) vs 61.8% of STDMI patients (with a success rate of 94.5%) (p = 0.012 for PCI success rates). In-hospital mortality was not significantly different (STDMI 6.3 vs STEMI 5.4%, p = 0.330). CONCLUSION: These data suggest that similar strategies (emergency CAG with PCI whenever feasible) should be applied to both these types of AMI. Clinics Cardive Publishing 2012-10 /pmc/articles/PMC3721943/ /pubmed/23108517 http://dx.doi.org/10.5830/CVJA-2012-053 Text en Copyright © 2010 Clinics Cardive Publishing http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.5/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Cardiovascular Topics Knot, Jiri Rohac, Fili P Petr, Robert Bil Kova, Dana Widimsky, Petr Bělohlavek, Jan Kala, Petr Rokyta, Richard Stasek, Josef Kuzmanov, Boyko Djambazov, Slavejko Grigorov, Mladen Nomaz, Ota Hli Comparison of outcomes in ST-segment depression and ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction patients treated with emergency PCI: data from a multicentre registry |
title | Comparison of outcomes in ST-segment depression and ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction patients treated with emergency PCI: data from a multicentre registry |
title_full | Comparison of outcomes in ST-segment depression and ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction patients treated with emergency PCI: data from a multicentre registry |
title_fullStr | Comparison of outcomes in ST-segment depression and ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction patients treated with emergency PCI: data from a multicentre registry |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of outcomes in ST-segment depression and ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction patients treated with emergency PCI: data from a multicentre registry |
title_short | Comparison of outcomes in ST-segment depression and ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction patients treated with emergency PCI: data from a multicentre registry |
title_sort | comparison of outcomes in st-segment depression and st-segment elevation myocardial infarction patients treated with emergency pci: data from a multicentre registry |
topic | Cardiovascular Topics |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3721943/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23108517 http://dx.doi.org/10.5830/CVJA-2012-053 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT knotjiri comparisonofoutcomesinstsegmentdepressionandstsegmentelevationmyocardialinfarctionpatientstreatedwithemergencypcidatafromamulticentreregistry AT rohacfilip comparisonofoutcomesinstsegmentdepressionandstsegmentelevationmyocardialinfarctionpatientstreatedwithemergencypcidatafromamulticentreregistry AT petrrobert comparisonofoutcomesinstsegmentdepressionandstsegmentelevationmyocardialinfarctionpatientstreatedwithemergencypcidatafromamulticentreregistry AT bilkovadana comparisonofoutcomesinstsegmentdepressionandstsegmentelevationmyocardialinfarctionpatientstreatedwithemergencypcidatafromamulticentreregistry AT widimskypetr comparisonofoutcomesinstsegmentdepressionandstsegmentelevationmyocardialinfarctionpatientstreatedwithemergencypcidatafromamulticentreregistry AT belohlavekjan comparisonofoutcomesinstsegmentdepressionandstsegmentelevationmyocardialinfarctionpatientstreatedwithemergencypcidatafromamulticentreregistry AT kalapetr comparisonofoutcomesinstsegmentdepressionandstsegmentelevationmyocardialinfarctionpatientstreatedwithemergencypcidatafromamulticentreregistry AT rokytarichard comparisonofoutcomesinstsegmentdepressionandstsegmentelevationmyocardialinfarctionpatientstreatedwithemergencypcidatafromamulticentreregistry AT stasekjosef comparisonofoutcomesinstsegmentdepressionandstsegmentelevationmyocardialinfarctionpatientstreatedwithemergencypcidatafromamulticentreregistry AT kuzmanovboyko comparisonofoutcomesinstsegmentdepressionandstsegmentelevationmyocardialinfarctionpatientstreatedwithemergencypcidatafromamulticentreregistry AT djambazovslavejko comparisonofoutcomesinstsegmentdepressionandstsegmentelevationmyocardialinfarctionpatientstreatedwithemergencypcidatafromamulticentreregistry AT grigorovmladen comparisonofoutcomesinstsegmentdepressionandstsegmentelevationmyocardialinfarctionpatientstreatedwithemergencypcidatafromamulticentreregistry AT nomazotahli comparisonofoutcomesinstsegmentdepressionandstsegmentelevationmyocardialinfarctionpatientstreatedwithemergencypcidatafromamulticentreregistry |