ABSTRACT
Objective To investigate the impacts of treating stratege for non-infarct related artery on clinical prognosis in elderly patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) after urgent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Methods From Augst 2007 to Augst 2010,a total of 75 elderly AMI patients (aged 75 years and over) were treated by urgent PCI and confirmed as multivessel coronary disease in our hospital. Among them,30 patients received medicine combined with PCI once again (PCI group) and 45 patients received only medicine treatemt (medicine group).The major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) and results ot coronary angiography after treatment for average one year were compared between the two groups. Results There were no significant differences in the rates of in stent restenosis[1 case(2.2 ％)vs.0 case],late loss of in-segment lumen [5 cases(11.1％)vs.3 cases(10.0％)],stent thrombosis[1 case(2.2％)vs.1 case(3.3％)] and larget vessel revascularization [2 cases (4.4 ％ ) vs.1 case ( 3.3 ％) ] between medicine group and PCI group (x2=0.00,0.00.2.03 and 0.00,all P＞0.05).The propertions of angina recurrence and second hospital admission for heart diseases were lower in PCI group than in medicine group [36 cases (80.0％)vs.14 cases(46.7％),18 cases(40.0％)vs.5 cases(16.7％),x2=9.00,4.61,P＜0.01and P＜0.05].However,no differences were found in the secondary heart failure,recurrent nonfatal myocardial infarction,severe arrhythmia,all- cause death and mortality rate of cardiovascular disease between the two groups (x2 =0.09,0.00,0.00,0.00 and 0.00,all P＞ 0.05). Conclusions Compared with single medicine therapy,the medicine combined with PCI for non- infarct-related artery may decrease the rates of angina recurrence and second hospital admission for heart diseases in elderly patients with AMI.