Search

Cardiogenic shock (CS) remains the most common cause of mortality in patients with acute myocardial infarction. The SHOCK trial (Should We Emergently Revascularize Occluded Coronaries for Cardiogenic Shock) demonstrated a survival benefit with early revascularization in patients with CS complicating acute myocardial infarction (AMICS) 20 years ago. After an initial improvement in mortality related to revascularization, mortality rates have plateaued. A recent Society of Coronary Angiography and Interventions classification scheme was developed to address the wide range of CS presentations. In addition, a recent scientific statement from the American Heart Association recommended the development of CS centers using standardized protocols for diagnosis and management of CS, including mechanical circulatory support devices (MCS). A number of CS programs have implemented various protocols for treating patients with AMICS, including the use of MCS, and have published promising results using such protocols. Despite this, practice patterns in the cardiac catheterization laboratory vary across health systems, and there are inconsistencies in the use or timing of MCS for AMICS. Furthermore, mortality benefit from MCS devices in AMICS has yet to be established in randomized clinical trials. In this article, we outline the best practices for the contemporary interventional management of AMICS, including coronary revascularization, the use of MCS, and special considerations such as the treatment of patients with AMICS with cardiac arrest. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: This study aimed to investigate the association between age and the risk of 30-day unplanned readmission among adult patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).Methods: This retrospective analysis included patients from the Nationwide Readmissions Database with AMI who underwent PCI during 2013-2014. We used multivariable logistic regression model to calculate adjusted odds ratios (AORs) for risk of readmission. To examine potential non-linear association, we performed logistic regression with restricted cubic splines (RCS).Results: Of the 492 550 patients with AMI aged above 18 years undergoing PCI during the index hospitalisation, 48 630 (9.87%) were readmitted within 30 days. Although the crude readmission rate of younger patients (aged 18-54 years) was the lowest (7.27%), younger patients had higher risk of readmission compared with patients aged 55-64 years for all-causes (AOR 1.06 (1.01 to 1.11), p=0.0129) and specific causes, such as AMI and chest pain (both cardiac and non-specific) after adjusted for covariates. Patients aged 65-74 years were at lower risk of all-cause readmission. Older patients (age ≥75 years) had higher risk of readmission for heart failure (AOR 1.50 (1.29 to 1.74)) and infection (AOR 1.44 (1.16 to 1.79)), but lower risk for chest pain. RCS analyses showed a U-shaped relationship between age and readmission risk.Conclusions: Our results suggest higher risk of readmission in younger patients for all-cause unplanned readmission after adjusted for covariates. The trends of readmission risk along with age were different for specific causes. Age-targeted initiatives are warranted to reduce preventable readmissions in patients with AMI undergoing PCI. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) of true bifurcation lesions (Medina classification 1, 1, 1; 1, 0, 1; or 0, 1, 1) is challenging and may involve either a 1-stent strategy with provisional side branch stenting, or a 2-stent strategy. Diabetes mellitus is associated with greater atherosclerotic burden and higher incidence of bifurcation lesions, and unfavorable outcomes after PCI. It is unknown whether use of newer everolimus-eluting stent (EES) implantation impacts relative outcomes of 1-stent and 2-stent strategies in patients with diabetes., Methods: We performed a retrospective analysis of consecutive patients with diabetes mellitus and complex true bifurcation lesions (side branch diameter >2.0 mm) who underwent PCI with EES between February 2010 and December 2011. We grouped subjects based on initial treatment to a 1-stent (n = 81) or 2-stent (n = 54) strategy, and compared baseline characteristics, quantitative coronary angiography, and 1-year major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE) rates, defined as death, myocardial infarction, target lesion revascularization (TLR), or target vessel revascularization (TVR)., Results: Baseline characteristics were well matched. A 2-stent strategy was associated with larger side-branch reference vessel diameter at baseline and post PCI. In-hospital events included 1 periprocedural myocardial infarction in each group and no deaths. At 1 year, there was no significant difference between 1-stent and 2-stent strategies in TVR rates (6.2% vs 3.7%; P=.53), TLR (both 3.7%; P>.99), or MACE (7.4% vs 3.7%; P=.37)., Conclusion: In this series of diabetic patients undergoing complex bifurcation PCI using EES implantation, there was no difference between 1-stent and 2-stent strategies with respect to ischemic events at 1 year.