ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: The aim of the present study was to assess the effect of a deferred invasive treatment strategy on long-term outcome in patients with a post-thrombolytic Q-wave myocardial infarction and inducible myocardial ischemia. DESIGN: Patients (N=751) with post-thrombolytic Q-wave myocardial infarction and inducible ischemia (angina pectoris or silent myocardial ischemia) were randomized to a deferred invasive treatment (balloon angioplasty or coronary bypass surgery) or medical treatment. Vital status and non-fatal cardiac events defined as hospitalization caused by acute cardiac events were recorded for a median of 11.4 years. RESULTS: Survival was significantly improved in patients receiving invasive treatment compared to patients treated medically (hazard ratio 0.85 (95% confidence limits 0.73-0.99), p=0.034). Subgroup analysis showed a reduction of non-fatal cardiac events and improved survival among the patients with post-infarction angina pectoris and not among the patients with silent myocardial ischemia. CONCLUSIONS: A deferred invasive treatment strategy improves survival compared to medical treatment in patients with inducible myocardial ischemia after a post-thrombolytic Q-wave myocardial infarction.
Subject(s)
Angioplasty, Balloon, Coronary , Coronary Artery Bypass , Myocardial Infarction/therapy , Myocardial Ischemia/therapy , Thrombolytic Therapy , Angina Pectoris/etiology , Angioplasty, Balloon, Coronary/adverse effects , Angioplasty, Balloon, Coronary/mortality , Chi-Square Distribution , Coronary Artery Bypass/adverse effects , Coronary Artery Bypass/mortality , Female , Humans , Kaplan-Meier Estimate , Male , Middle Aged , Myocardial Infarction/complications , Myocardial Infarction/mortality , Myocardial Ischemia/complications , Myocardial Ischemia/mortality , Thrombolytic Therapy/adverse effects , Thrombolytic Therapy/mortality , Time Factors , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Patients with ischemic heart failure and reversible dysfunctional myocardium (Hibernating myocardium, HIB) can benefit from revascularization. These patients can be selected with nuclear methods. The purpose of this study was to describe the results of the imaging procedures in patients tested for HIB and relate the results to the choice of treatment and cause of death. MATERIALS AND METHODS: During a 2-year period 51 patients were referred to determine the amount of HIB. This can be determined with blood flow and metabolic imaging of the heart. Resting-myocardial perfusion imaging was performed with 99mTc-sestamibi and glucose metabolism was visualized with 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose (18F-FDG) gamma camera PET. Medical records and death certificate were reviewed retrospectively. RESULTS: 50 patients were included. We found an increased survival among patients with HIB who underwent revascularization (1 year mortality 6% vs. 33%, p = 0,004). Patients with HIB who did not undergo revascularization had an increased risk of sudden death. (5/15 patients vs. 0/35 patients, p = 0,003). CONCLUSION: Despite a simplified method we find the same increased mortality among medically-treated patients with HIB as in earlier studies. This and earlier studies are all retrospective with the risk of selection bias. Prospective studies are underway. Nuclear imaging is useful in evaluating patients with heart failure before revascularization.
