Prospective observational study assesses echocardiographic indices' role in predicting major adverse cardiovascular events in ST-elevation myocardial infarction patients.
Background Acute coronary syndromes and ST-elevation myocardial infarction remain significant causes of global morbidity and mortality. Despite existing noninvasive risk stratification schemes, ST-elevation myocardial infarction risk prediction requires further characterization. This study aims to assess echocardiographic indices in predicting major adverse cardiovascular events post-ST-elevation myocardial infarction. Aims and Objectives Investigate the Tei Index in ST-elevation myocardial infarction and assess its association with major adverse cardiovascular events and coronary lesion severity. Determine if Tei Index, E/e′, and deceleration time independently predict major adverse cardiovascular events in acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction. Materials and Methods Conducted at the Department of Cardiology, at a tertiary medical facility from February 2014 to August 2015. Clinical evaluations, laboratory tests, echocardiographic examinations, and coronary angiography were performed among 400 patients. Statistical analyses provided insights into ST-elevation myocardial infarction characteristics and outcomes. Results Risk factor prevalence and demographic distribution were highlighted. Left ventricular ejection fraction, Tei Index, deceleration time, and E/e′ ratio exhibited significant associations with clinical severity. Killip class showed a positive correlation, with left ventricular ejection fraction admission (ADM) having an exceptionally high negative correlation. Tei ADM, deceleration time ADM, and E/e′ ADM also revealed significant correlations. Conclusion Tei Index, E/e′, and deceleration time are independent predictors of major adverse cardiovascular events in acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction. The Tei Index demonstrated the highest predictive accuracy. Routine Tei Index measurement in acute myocardial infarction patient assessments is advocated for its ease and valuable prognostic insights.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sur et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: