Search

Additional file 1.

Although statin use in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) is mandatory, it has been suggested to be associated with new-onset diabetes mellitus (NODM). In real world practice, moderate-intensity statin therapy is more commonly used than high-intensity statin therapy. In this study, we investigated the impact of moderate-intensity pitavastatin (2 to 4 mg) compared with moderate-intensity atorvastatin (10 to 20 mg) and rosuvastatin (5 to 10 mg) on the development of NODM during a follow-up period of up to 3years. Between November 2011 and May 2015, 2001 patients with AMI who did not have diabetes mellitus were investigated. The cumulative incidence of NODM was evaluated in all groups. To adjust for potential confounders, multinomial propensity scores were used. Cox proportional hazard models were used to assess the hazard ratio of NODM in the atorvastatin and rosuvastatin groups compared with pitavastatin group. The cumulative incidence of NODM was significantly lower in pitavastatin group compared with the atorvastatin and rosuvastatin groups (3.0% vs 8.4% vs 10.4%, respectively; Log-rank p value = 0.001). After weighting the baseline characteristics of the 3 statin groups by multinomial propensity scores, atorvastatin (hazard ratio: 2.615, 95% confidence interval: 1.163 to 5.879) and rosuvastatin (hazard ratio: 3.906, 95% confidence interval: 1.756 to 8.688) were found to be associated with a higher incidence of NODM compared with pitavastatin therapy on multivariable analysis. Moderate-intensity pitavastatin therapy is associated with a lower incidence of NODM in patients with AMI andhas similar clinical outcomes to moderate-intensity atorvastatin and rosuvastatin therapy.

It is unknown whether drug-eluting stents (DES), in comparison with bare-metal stents (BMS), improve clinical outcomes of ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients with renal insufficiency. We aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of BMS versus DES, as well as sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) versus paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES), in STEMI patients with renal insufficiency.From the Korea Acute Myocardial Infarction Registry, 874 STEMI patients with renal insufficiency (glomerular filtration rate60 ml/min) comprising 116 patients with BMS and 758 patients with DES (430 SES and 328 PES) implantation were selected. Major adverse cardiac events (MACE) within 1 year, defined as composite of all-cause mortality, nonfatal myocardial infarction and target lesion revascularization were compared. In addition to multivariate adjusted analysis, propensity analysis for stent choice was performed.With a median follow-up of 342 days, 116 MACE occurred. MACE was more frequent in the BMS group than in the DES group before (HR [95% CI]=2.3 [1.3-3.8]) and after propensity score matching (HR [95% CI]=2.0 [1.0-3.8]). The difference of MACE was mainly driven by a higher rate of target lesion revascularization rate in the BMS group. In comparison between SES and PES, there was no significant difference between the 2 groups in propensity score-matched populations (HR [95% CI]=0.7 [0.4-1.1]).In STEMI patients with renal insufficiency, DES implantation exhibits a favorable 1 year clinical outcomes than BMS implantation, however, no difference was found between SES and PES.

The Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) risk score (TRS) has proven value in predicting prognosis in unstable angina/non ST-elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) as well as in ST-elevation myocardial infarction. The TRS system has little implication, however, in the extent of myocardial damage in high-risk patients with NSTEMI. A total of 1621 patients (63.6±12.2 years; 1043 males) with NSTEMI were enrolled in the Korea Acute Myocardial Infarction Registry (KAMIR). We analyzed the risk for major adverse cardiac events (MACE) during a 6-month follow-up period. The TRS system showed good correlation with MACE for patients in the low and intermediate groups but had poor correlation when the high-risk group was included (p=0.128). The MACE rate was 3.8% for TRS 1, 9.4% for TRS 2, 10.7% for TRS 3, and 12.3% for TRS 4 (HR=1.29, p=0.026). Among the biomarkers and clinical risk factors, elevated N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) (HR=2.61, p=0.001) and Killip class above III showed good correlation with MACE (HR=0.302, p 65 years, history of ischemic heart disease, Killip class above III, and elevated pro-BNP levels above the 75th percentile. This modified scoring system, when tested for validity, showed good predictive value for MACE (HR=1.64, p