ABSTRACT
Objective To evaluate the predictive value of IABP SHOCK Ⅱ risk score in in-hospital mortality of patients with ST segment elevation myocardial infarction complicated with cardiogenic shock (CS). Methods From August 2011 to August 2013, the clinical data of 89 patients with cardiogenic shock after STEMI treated with primary PCI and then supported by using IABP were retrospectively analyzed. The IABP SHOCK Ⅱ risk score were calculated from the data at admission and primary PCI. Comparisons of general information, medication and intervention, pre/post IABP vital life signs and in-hospital death were carried out among patients with different risk stratifications. Results The area under ROC curve of risk stratification was 0.723. The patients were categorized into low risk group (score 0-2, n=71) and intermediate-high risk group (score 3-9, n=18).The patients in intermediate-high risk group were with advanced age, high rate of diabetes mellitus, history of stroke, renal insufficiency, higher serum lactate and glucose at admission compared with low risk group. And more patients in intermediate-high risk group had impaired post-PCI coronary flow (TIMI flow grade<3). Conclusions The IABP SHOCK Ⅱ risk score is a simple and useful risk score for predicting in-hospital mortality of STEMIpatients complicated with CS. Though the patietns are treated with primary PCI and then supported by IABP, the in-hospital mortality of patients with IABP SHOCK Ⅱ risk score ≥ 3 increases significantly.
ABSTRACT
Background Primary percutaneous intervention (PPCI) is the treatment of choice for ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) but robust evidence in the very elderly is lacking. We compared PPCI outcomes between different age quartiles (quartile 1<60 years, quartile 2≥60 to<70 years, quartile 3≥70 to<80 years, quartile 4≥80 years). Methods Retrospective observational analysis of our Morriston Tertiary Cardiac Center (Abertawe Bro Morgannwg University Health Board) patients from 2005 to 2010 with STEMI who underwent PPCI. Results Of 434 patients, 57 (13%) were in quartile 4 (≥80 years). In older age quartiles, patients were less likely to receive a drug eluting stent (DES, P=0.001) or glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitor (GPI, P<0.0001). Increase in age was associated with reduced time to survival (β-coefficient:?0.192, t:?3.70, 95%CI:?4.91 to?1.50, P<0.0001) as was the presence of cardiogenic shock (β-coefficient:?0.194, t=3.77, 95%CI: ?5.26 to?1.65, P<0.0001). Use of GPI was associated with increased time to survival (β-coefficient: 0.138, t= 2.82, 95%CI:1.58–8.58, P=0.005) but older age quartiles were less likely to receive GPI (P<0.0001). In-hospital mortality (1.8%quartile 1, 3.6%quar-tile 2, 10.9%quartile 3 and 12.3%quartile 4, P=0.002) and 1-year mortality (5.4%quartile 1, 5.5%quartile 2, 16.8%quartile 3 and 24.6%quartile 4, P<0.0001, respectively) was significantly higher in older age quartiles. Conclusions Increased short term and intermediate term mortality is seen in the very elderly after PPCI. Age and cardiogenic shock were prognostic factors. Intervention should not be based on age alone and awareness regarding prognostic factors can help improve management.
ABSTRACT
Resumen Finalidades: la intervención percutánea coronaria primaria (pPCI, por sus siglas en inglés) ha reemplazado la trombolisis como tratamiento de elección para el infarto de miocardo con elevación del segmento ST (STEMI por sus siglas en inglés). Sin embargo, la incidencia y la importancia pronóstica del bloqueo aurículoventricular de alto grado (BAV-AG) en pacientes con STEMI en la era de pPCI han sido poco estudiadas. El objetivo de este estudio fue evaluar la incidencia, los predictores y la importancia pronóstica of BAV-AG en pacientes con STEMI tratados con pPCI. Métodos y resultados: este estudio incluyó 2073 pacientes con STEMI tratado con pPCI. Los pacientes fueron identificados a través de un registro hospitalario y el Registro Nacional de Pacientes de Dinamarca. Ambos registros se usaron también para establecer el diagnóstico de BAV-AG. La mortalidad por todas las causas fue la variable evaluable primaria. Durante un seguimiento con una mediana de 2,9 años [rango del intercuartil (IQR): 1,8-4,0] fallecieron 266 pacientes. Se documentó bloqueo aurículoventricular de alto grado en 67 (3,2%) pacientes, 25 de los cuales murieron. Entre los predictores independientes importantes de presentar BAV-AG, se incluyeron la oclusión de la arteria coronaria derecha, edad >65 años, género femenino, hipertensión, y diabetes. La tasa de mortalidad ajustada aumentó significativamente en pacientes con BAV-AG comparado con pacientes sin BAV-AG [cociente de riesgos instantáneos » 3,14 (intervalo de confianza 95%: 2,04-4,84), P < 0,001]. Un análisis relevante 30 días después del STEMI mostró iguales tasas de mortalidad en los dos grupos. Conclusión: la incidencia de BAV-AG en pacientes con STEMI tratado con pPCI se ha reducido comparado con los informes de la era trombolítica. Sin embargo, a pesar de esta mejora, en la era de pPCI el bloqueo AV de alto grado sigue siendo un marcador pronóstico severo. La tasa de mortalidad solo aumentó dentro de los primeros 30 días. Los pacientes con bloqueo aurículoventricular de alto grado que sobrevivieron más allá de este punto temporal tuvieron así un pronóstico igual al de los pacientes sin BAV-AG
Summary Aims: Primary percutaneous coronary intervention (pPCI) has replaced thrombolysis as treatment-of-choice for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). However, the incidence and prognostic significance of high-degree atrioventricular block (HAVB) in STEMI patients in the pPCI era has been only sparsely investigated. The objective of this study was to assess the incidence, predictors and prognostic significance of HAVB in STEMI patients treated with pPCI. Methods and results: This study included 2073 STEMI patients treated with pPCI. The patients were identified through a hospital register and the Danish National Patient Register. Both registers were also used to establish the diagnosis of HAVB. All-cause mortality was the primary endpoint. During a median follow-up of 2.9 years [interquartile range (IQR) 1.8-4.0] 266 patients died. High-degree atrioventricular block was documented in 67 (3.2%) patients of whom 25 died. Significant independent predictors of HAVB included right coronary artery occlusion, age .65 years, female gender, hypertension, and diabetes. The adjusted mortality rate was significantly increased in patients with HAVB compared to patients without HAVB [hazard ratio = 3.14 (95% confidence interval 2.04-4.84), P < 0.001]. A landmark-analysis 30 days post-STEMI showed equal mortality rates in the two groups. Conclusion: The incidence of HAVB in STEMI patients treated with pPCI has been reduced compared with reports from the thrombolytic era. However, despite this improvement high-degree AV block remains a severe prognostic marker in the pPCI era. The mortality rate was only increased within the first 30 days. High-degree atrioventricular block patients who survived beyond this time-point thus had a prognosis equal to patients without HAVB