Key result
In-hospital recurrent myocardial infarction in ACS patients was associated with significantly higher 1-year mortality compared to no recurrence (30.5% vs 11.7%; P<.001).
Why the study?
Does in-hospital recurrent myocardial infarction worsen short- and long-term outcomes in patients with acute coronary syndrome?
Observational (n=7,925)
Yes
Does in-hospital recurrent myocardial infarction worsen short- and long-term outcomes in patients with acute coronary syndrome?
Absolute Event Rate: 30.5% vs 11.7%
p-value: p=<.001
In-hospital recurrent myocardial infarction in ACS patients is associated with decreased use of evidence-based therapies on admission and significantly higher short- and long-term mortality.
Flags ACS patients for intensified monitoring; leaves open whether preventing in-hospital Re-MI improves survival.
BACKGROUND: Little is known about the predictors and prognostic impact of recurrent in-hospital ischemia and infarction in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS). Our objectives were to determine the baseline characteristics, risk factors, and long-term outcomes of patients with recurrent myocardial infarction (Re-MI). METHODS: We evaluated patients with ACS who were enrolled in the second Gulf Registry of Acute Coronary Events from October 2008 to June 2009. RESULTS: Of 7925 patients with ACS, 167 (2.1%) developed in-hospital Re-MI. Patients with Re-MI were older (mean age: 58.7 ± 13.4 vs 56.8 ± 12.6; P = .045), had higher rates of hyperlipidemia (42.5% vs 32.6%; P = .019), and were more likely to present with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI; 74.25% vs 43.9%; P < .001) and Killip class 4 (8.4% vs 3.2%; P < .001) than patients without Re-MI. Patients with Re-MI were less likely to receive evidence-based therapies upon admission, including aspirin (94.6% vs 98.5%; P < .001), β-blockers (59.3% vs 74.7%; P < .001), and statins (86.8% vs 94.9%; P < .001), and were less frequently assessed with coronary angiography (29.3% vs 32.5%; P = .029). Predictors of recurrent events included history of angina, hypotension on presentation, admission diagnosis of STEMI, and decreased use of evidence-based therapies including aspirin, statins, and β-blockers upon admission. Patients with Re-MI had more in-hospital complications, including congestive heart failure (44.3% vs 12.4%) and cardiogenic shock (26.4% vs 5.3%), as well as higher mortality rates during hospitalization (23.4% vs 4.1%) and after a discharge period of 30 days (27% vs 7.8%) and 1 year (30.5% vs 11.7%; P < .001 for all comparisons). CONCLUSION: In our study, patients with Re-MI were less likely to receive evidence-based therapies and had a worse prognosis in terms of in-hospital complications and higher mortality rates. High-risk patients should be monitored and managed differently to prevent secondary attacks.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Saleh et al. (2016) conducted an observational in Acute Coronary Syndrome (n=7,925). In-hospital recurrent myocardial infarction (Re-MI) vs. No recurrent myocardial infarction was evaluated on 1-year mortality (p=<.001). In-hospital recurrent myocardial infarction in ACS patients was associated with significantly higher 1-year mortality compared to no recurrence (30.5% vs 11.7%; P<.001).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: