Cargando…
Fibrinolysis vs. primary percutaneous coronary intervention for ST‐segment elevation myocardial infarction cardiogenic shock
AIMS: There are limited contemporary data on the use of initial fibrinolysis in ST‐segment elevation myocardial infarction cardiogenic shock (STEMI‐CS). This study sought to compare the outcomes of STEMI‐CS receiving initial fibrinolysis vs. primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI). METHODS...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8120407/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33704924 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ehf2.13281 |
_version_ | 1783692088206950400 |
---|---|
author | Vallabhajosyula, Saraschandra Verghese, Dhiran Bell, Malcolm R. Murphree, Dennis H. Cheungpasitporn, Wisit Miller, Paul Elliott Dunlay, Shannon M. Prasad, Abhiram Sandhu, Gurpreet S. Gulati, Rajiv Singh, Mandeep Lerman, Amir Gersh, Bernard J. Holmes, David R. Barsness, Gregory W. |
author_facet | Vallabhajosyula, Saraschandra Verghese, Dhiran Bell, Malcolm R. Murphree, Dennis H. Cheungpasitporn, Wisit Miller, Paul Elliott Dunlay, Shannon M. Prasad, Abhiram Sandhu, Gurpreet S. Gulati, Rajiv Singh, Mandeep Lerman, Amir Gersh, Bernard J. Holmes, David R. Barsness, Gregory W. |
author_sort | Vallabhajosyula, Saraschandra |
collection | PubMed |
description | AIMS: There are limited contemporary data on the use of initial fibrinolysis in ST‐segment elevation myocardial infarction cardiogenic shock (STEMI‐CS). This study sought to compare the outcomes of STEMI‐CS receiving initial fibrinolysis vs. primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI). METHODS: Using the National (Nationwide) Inpatient Sample from 2009 to 2017, a comparative effectiveness study of adult (>18 years) STEMI‐CS admissions receiving pre‐hospital/in‐hospital fibrinolysis were compared with those receiving PPCI. Admissions with alternate indications for fibrinolysis and STEMI‐CS managed medically or with surgical revascularization (without fibrinolysis) were excluded. Outcomes of interest included in‐hospital mortality, development of non‐cardiac organ failure, complications, hospital length of stay, hospitalization costs, use of palliative care, and do‐not‐resuscitate status. RESULTS: During 2009–2017, 5297 and 110 452 admissions received initial fibrinolysis and PPCI, respectively. Compared with those receiving PPCI, the fibrinolysis group was more often non‐White, with lower co‐morbidity, and admitted on weekends and to small rural hospitals (all P < 0.001). In the fibrinolysis group, 95.3%, 77.4%, and 15.7% received angiography, PCI, and coronary artery bypass grafting, respectively. The fibrinolysis group had higher rates of haemorrhagic complications (13.5% vs. 9.9%; P < 0.001). The fibrinolysis group had comparable all‐cause in‐hospital mortality [logistic regression analysis: 28.8% vs. 28.5%; propensity‐matched analysis: 30.8% vs. 30.3%; adjusted odds ratio 0.97 (95% confidence interval 0.90–1.05); P = 0.50]. The fibrinolysis group had comparable rates of acute organ failure, hospital length of stay, rates of palliative care referrals, do‐not‐resuscitate status use, and lesser hospitalization costs. CONCLUSIONS: The use of initial fibrinolysis had comparable in‐hospital mortality than those receiving PPCI in STEMI‐CS in the contemporary era in this large national observational study. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8120407 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | John Wiley and Sons Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-81204072021-05-21 Fibrinolysis vs. primary percutaneous coronary intervention for ST‐segment elevation myocardial infarction cardiogenic shock Vallabhajosyula, Saraschandra Verghese, Dhiran Bell, Malcolm R. Murphree, Dennis H. Cheungpasitporn, Wisit Miller, Paul Elliott Dunlay, Shannon M. Prasad, Abhiram Sandhu, Gurpreet S. Gulati, Rajiv Singh, Mandeep Lerman, Amir Gersh, Bernard J. Holmes, David R. Barsness, Gregory W. ESC Heart Fail Original Research Articles AIMS: There are limited contemporary data on the use of initial fibrinolysis in ST‐segment elevation myocardial infarction cardiogenic shock (STEMI‐CS). This study sought to compare the outcomes of STEMI‐CS receiving initial fibrinolysis vs. primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI). METHODS: Using the National (Nationwide) Inpatient Sample from 2009 to 2017, a comparative effectiveness study of adult (>18 years) STEMI‐CS admissions receiving pre‐hospital/in‐hospital fibrinolysis were compared with those receiving PPCI. Admissions with alternate indications for fibrinolysis and STEMI‐CS managed medically or with surgical revascularization (without fibrinolysis) were excluded. Outcomes of interest included in‐hospital mortality, development of non‐cardiac organ failure, complications, hospital length of stay, hospitalization costs, use of palliative care, and do‐not‐resuscitate status. RESULTS: During 2009–2017, 5297 and 110 452 admissions received initial fibrinolysis and PPCI, respectively. Compared with those receiving PPCI, the fibrinolysis group was more often non‐White, with lower co‐morbidity, and admitted on weekends and to small rural hospitals (all P < 0.001). In the fibrinolysis group, 95.3%, 77.4%, and 15.7% received angiography, PCI, and coronary artery bypass grafting, respectively. The fibrinolysis group had higher rates of haemorrhagic complications (13.5% vs. 9.9%; P < 0.001). The fibrinolysis group had comparable all‐cause in‐hospital mortality [logistic regression analysis: 28.8% vs. 28.5%; propensity‐matched analysis: 30.8% vs. 30.3%; adjusted odds ratio 0.97 (95% confidence interval 0.90–1.05); P = 0.50]. The fibrinolysis group had comparable rates of acute organ failure, hospital length of stay, rates of palliative care referrals, do‐not‐resuscitate status use, and lesser hospitalization costs. CONCLUSIONS: The use of initial fibrinolysis had comparable in‐hospital mortality than those receiving PPCI in STEMI‐CS in the contemporary era in this large national observational study. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2021-03-11 /pmc/articles/PMC8120407/ /pubmed/33704924 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ehf2.13281 Text en © 2021 The Authors. ESC Heart Failure published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Society of Cardiology. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made. |
spellingShingle | Original Research Articles Vallabhajosyula, Saraschandra Verghese, Dhiran Bell, Malcolm R. Murphree, Dennis H. Cheungpasitporn, Wisit Miller, Paul Elliott Dunlay, Shannon M. Prasad, Abhiram Sandhu, Gurpreet S. Gulati, Rajiv Singh, Mandeep Lerman, Amir Gersh, Bernard J. Holmes, David R. Barsness, Gregory W. Fibrinolysis vs. primary percutaneous coronary intervention for ST‐segment elevation myocardial infarction cardiogenic shock |
title | Fibrinolysis vs. primary percutaneous coronary intervention for ST‐segment elevation myocardial infarction cardiogenic shock |
title_full | Fibrinolysis vs. primary percutaneous coronary intervention for ST‐segment elevation myocardial infarction cardiogenic shock |
title_fullStr | Fibrinolysis vs. primary percutaneous coronary intervention for ST‐segment elevation myocardial infarction cardiogenic shock |
title_full_unstemmed | Fibrinolysis vs. primary percutaneous coronary intervention for ST‐segment elevation myocardial infarction cardiogenic shock |
title_short | Fibrinolysis vs. primary percutaneous coronary intervention for ST‐segment elevation myocardial infarction cardiogenic shock |
title_sort | fibrinolysis vs. primary percutaneous coronary intervention for st‐segment elevation myocardial infarction cardiogenic shock |
topic | Original Research Articles |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8120407/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33704924 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ehf2.13281 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT vallabhajosyulasaraschandra fibrinolysisvsprimarypercutaneouscoronaryinterventionforstsegmentelevationmyocardialinfarctioncardiogenicshock AT verghesedhiran fibrinolysisvsprimarypercutaneouscoronaryinterventionforstsegmentelevationmyocardialinfarctioncardiogenicshock AT bellmalcolmr fibrinolysisvsprimarypercutaneouscoronaryinterventionforstsegmentelevationmyocardialinfarctioncardiogenicshock AT murphreedennish fibrinolysisvsprimarypercutaneouscoronaryinterventionforstsegmentelevationmyocardialinfarctioncardiogenicshock AT cheungpasitpornwisit fibrinolysisvsprimarypercutaneouscoronaryinterventionforstsegmentelevationmyocardialinfarctioncardiogenicshock AT millerpaulelliott fibrinolysisvsprimarypercutaneouscoronaryinterventionforstsegmentelevationmyocardialinfarctioncardiogenicshock AT dunlayshannonm fibrinolysisvsprimarypercutaneouscoronaryinterventionforstsegmentelevationmyocardialinfarctioncardiogenicshock AT prasadabhiram fibrinolysisvsprimarypercutaneouscoronaryinterventionforstsegmentelevationmyocardialinfarctioncardiogenicshock AT sandhugurpreets fibrinolysisvsprimarypercutaneouscoronaryinterventionforstsegmentelevationmyocardialinfarctioncardiogenicshock AT gulatirajiv fibrinolysisvsprimarypercutaneouscoronaryinterventionforstsegmentelevationmyocardialinfarctioncardiogenicshock AT singhmandeep fibrinolysisvsprimarypercutaneouscoronaryinterventionforstsegmentelevationmyocardialinfarctioncardiogenicshock AT lermanamir fibrinolysisvsprimarypercutaneouscoronaryinterventionforstsegmentelevationmyocardialinfarctioncardiogenicshock AT gershbernardj fibrinolysisvsprimarypercutaneouscoronaryinterventionforstsegmentelevationmyocardialinfarctioncardiogenicshock AT holmesdavidr fibrinolysisvsprimarypercutaneouscoronaryinterventionforstsegmentelevationmyocardialinfarctioncardiogenicshock AT barsnessgregoryw fibrinolysisvsprimarypercutaneouscoronaryinterventionforstsegmentelevationmyocardialinfarctioncardiogenicshock |