Search

Background: Acute myocardial infarction (AMI) has poorer outcomes in disadvantaged populations such as those in regional and remote locations. We compared long-term outcomes associated with presentation to regional or remote hospitals among AMI patients.Methods and Results: Administrative claims data from New South Wales (27% regional and remote residents) was used to identify patients >18 years admitted to any NSW hospital with a principal diagnosis of AMI (ICD10 codes: I21·0-I21·4) between 01/07/2004 and 30/06/2008. Hospital of presentation location with a population of <250,000 was defined as regional and remote while hospitals with a population >250,000 were deemed urban. Receipt of revascularisation and mortality were analysed and adjusted for age, comorbidities and previous revascularisation. Patients were censored at death or end of the follow-up period (31 December 2009). 39,798 patients were identified with 9,393 (23.6%) regional and remote presenters. In multivariable models, regional and remote presentation was associated with reduced rates of revascularisation (OR 0.30 95%CI 0.28-0.32; p<0.001), no impact on overall mortality (HR 1.04 95%CI 0.99-1.02; p=0.11), but with increased mortality for patients presenting with STEMI (HR 1.14; 95% CI 1.06-1.23; p<0.001). The propensity analysis was consistent with these findings.Conclusions: Presentation to a regional and remote hospital was associated with lower revascularisation rates following AMI, but with a higher long-term mortality if presenting with ST segment elevation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: A lack of clarity exists about the role of complete coronary revascularization in patients presenting with non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction.Objectives: The aim of our study was to compare long-term outcomes in terms of major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events of 2 different complete coronary revascularization strategies in patients with non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction and multivessel coronary artery disease: 1-stage percutaneous coronary intervention (1S-PCI) during the index procedure versus multistage percutaneous coronary intervention (MS-PCI) complete coronary revascularization during the index hospitalization.Methods: In the SMILE (Impact of Different Treatment in Multivessel Non ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction Patients: One Stage Versus Multistaged Percutaneous Coronary Intervention) trial, 584 patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 manner to 1S-PCI or MS-PCI. The primary study endpoint was the incidence of major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events, which were defined as cardiac death, death, reinfarction, rehospitalization for unstable angina, repeat coronary revascularization (target vessel revascularization), and stroke at 1 year.Results: The occurrence of the primary endpoint was significantly lower in the 1-stage group (1S-PCI: n = 36 [13.63%] vs. MS-PCI: n = 61 [23.19%]; hazard ratio [HR]: 0.549 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.363 to 0.828]; p = 0.004). The 1-year rate of target vessel revascularization was significantly higher in the MS-PCI group (1S-PCI: n = 22 [8.33%] vs. MS-PCI: n = 40 [15.20%]; HR: 0.522 [95% CI: 0.310 to 0.878]; p = 0.01; p log-rank = 0.013). When the analyses were limited to cardiac death (1S-PCI: n = 9 [3.41%] vs. MS-PCI: n = 14 [5.32%]; HR: 0.624 [95% CI: 0.270 to 1.441]; p = 0.27) and myocardial infarction (1S-PCI: n = 7 [2.65%] vs. MS-PCI: n = 10 [3.80%]; HR: 0.678 [95% CI: 0.156 to 2.657]; p = 0.46), no significant differences were observed between groups.Conclusions: In multivessel non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction patients, complete 1-stage coronary revascularization is superior to multistage PCI in terms of major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events. (Impact of Different Treatment in Multivessel Non ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction [NSTEMI]Patients: One Stage Versus Multistaged Percutaneous Coronary Intervention [PCI] [SMILE]: NCT01478984). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: The purpose of this study was to determine whether, in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), the reduction in cardiac mortality in those taking bivalirudin compared with unfractionated heparin plus a glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitor (UFH+GPI) can be fully attributed to reduced bleeding. Background: The association between hemorrhagic complications and mortality may explain the survival benefit with bivalirudin. Methods: A total of 3,602 STEMI patients undergoing primary PCI were randomized to bivalirudin versus UFH+GPI. Three-year cardiac mortality was analyzed in patients with and without major bleeding. Results: When compared with UFH+GPI, bivalirudin resulted in lower 3-year rates of major bleeding (6.9% vs. 10.5%, hazard ratio [HR]: 0.64 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.51 to 0.80], p < 0.0001) and cardiac mortality (2.9% vs. 5.1%, HR: 0.56 [95% CI: 0.40 to 0.80], p = 0.001). Three-year cardiac mortality was reduced in bivalirudin-treated patients with major bleeding (20 fewer deaths with bivalirudin; 5.8% vs. 14.6%, p = 0.025) and without major bleeding (18 fewer deaths with bivalirudin; 2.6% vs. 3.8%, p = 0.048). In a fully-adjusted multivariable model accounting for major bleeding and other adverse events, bivalirudin was still associated with a 43% reduction in 3-year cardiac mortality (adjusted HR: 0.57 [95% CI: 0.39 to 0.83], p = 0.003). Conclusions: Bivalirudin reduces cardiac mortality in patients with STEMI undergoing primary PCI, an effect that can only partly be attributed to prevention of bleeding. Further studies are required to identify the nonhematologic benefits of bivalirudin. (Harmonizing Outcomes With Revascularization and Stents in Acute Myocardial Infarction; NCT00433966) [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is the optimal method of reperfusion when performed expeditiously. Factors contributing to delays in PCI for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) have not been thoroughly characterized or quantified. We sought to identify the factors associated with the delays to reperfusion in patients with STEMI undergoing primary PCI. Primary PCI was performed in 3,340 patients with STEMI in the international, multicenter Harmonizing Outcomes with Revascularization and Stents in Acute Myocardial Infarction trial. Multivariate analysis was used to identify independent predictors of delay in achieving reperfusion from 38 baseline and procedural variables. A total of 905 patients (27.1%) presented to non-PCI hospitals and were subsequently transferred; the remainder presented to PCI hospitals. The most powerful independent predictor of the interval from symptom onset to arrival at the PCI hospital and the first door-to-balloon time was an initial presentation at a non-PCI hospital (median incremental 58- and 54-minute delay, respectively, both p <0.001). Other independent predictors of prolonged door-to-balloon times included presentation with respiratory failure (42-minute incremental delay, p = 0.003), presentation during off-work hours (11-minute incremental delay, p <0.001), and co-morbid conditions such as diabetes and heart failure. In conclusion, among patients undergoing primary PCI, presentation to a non-PCI hospital was the variable associated with the greatest delay to reperfusion. Systems of care that encourage ambulance diagnosis and direct delivery of patients with STEMI to a PCI hospital might shorten the overall door-to-balloon times and improve the clinical outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Aim: To examine the impact of primary stent implantation versus balloon angioplasty on long-term outcome (median 8 years) in 117 patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) from randomized trials. Methods: Enrolled patients were those presenting with STEMI within 12 h of symptom onset. Patients were randomized to either Palmaz–Schatz stent implantation (N =25) or balloon angioplasty (N =23) between January and November 1996; or Palmaz–Schatz (N =26), or Cordis coil stent implantation (N =24) or balloon angioplasty (N =19) between February 1998 and March 1999. Results: Patients (67±11 years) arrived to the hospital within median 2.5 h of symptom onset with Killip 1/2/3/4 grade (72/19/7/2%, respectively). The culprit lesion was located in the left anterior descending (50%), right (39%), or left circumflex coronary artery (11%) with TIMI 0/1/2/3 flow (81/5/12/2%, respectively). Clinical/angiographic features were comparable between the 2 groups. During follow-up, there was a significant reduction in cardiac mortality in the stent group (5%) compared to the angioplasty group (17%, log-rank test p =0.04). In addition, the stent group had a lower target lesion revascularization rate (28% versus 52%, p =0.008), and a significantly lower major adverse cardiac event rate (37% versus 67%, p =0.005), than the angioplasty group. Conclusion: Compared to balloon angioplasty, primary stenting resulted in a sustained beneficial effect on cardiac mortality at 8 years. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

We evaluated the use and outcomes of drug-eluting stents (DESs) and bare metal stents (BMSs) in a large primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction (MI) trial. Recently concerns have been raised with “off-label” use of DESs for short- and long-term clinical outcomes. Limited randomized data exist evaluating DESs versus BMSs in ST-elevation MI. Patients (n = 5,745) in the Assessment of Pexelizumab in Acute Myocardial Infarction (APEX-AMI) trial were categorized by stent type used. Baseline variables and clinical outcomes were collected at 90 days and 6 months. Outcomes by stent type were adjusted for using conventional multivariable predictors of 90-day mortality (age, anterior location, total ST-segment deviation, and Killip class), time to PCI, and Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction grade flow. Stents were deployed (at the investigator''s discretion) in 5,124 patients (89.2%) with acute MI, with DES use in 2,221 (43.3%) and BMS use in 2,903 (56.7%). Patients receiving DESs were younger (median 59 vs 63 years of age, p <0.001), had left anterior descending coronary artery PCI (57.9% vs 48.1%, p <0.001), and often were treated in the United States (58.2%). DES-treated patients had a lower adjusted mortality at 90 days (hazard ratio 0.73, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.54 to 0.99, p = 0.046) and trended toward lower mortality (hazard ratio 0.77, 95% CI 0.58 to 1.03, p = 0.084) and recurrent MI (hazard ratio 0.81, 95% CI 0.59 to 1.11, p = 0.186) at 6 months compared with BMSs. In conclusion, in this observational analysis of stent use from a large primary percutaneous intervention for acute MI trial, DESs appear as safe as BMSs with similar 6-month clinical outcomes with regard to death and recurrent MI. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]