Key result
Higher hospital cardiac arrest volume shows no association with in-hospital mortality in MI.
Why the study?
Little is known about how differences in out of hospital cardiac arrest patient volume affect in-hospital myocardial infarction mortality.
Does admission to hospitals with a higher proportion of cardiac arrest MI patients increase in-hospital mortality for MI patients?
Observational (n=252,882)
Yes
Does admission to hospitals with a higher proportion of cardiac arrest MI patients increase in-hospital mortality for MI patients?
Treating a higher proportion of cardiac arrest patients with MI does not adversely affect a hospital's overall risk-adjusted in-hospital MI mortality.
No excess adjusted mortality at high-volume cardiac arrest MI hospitals; leaves open whether volume-based triage improves outcomes.
BACKGROUND: Little is known about how differences in out of hospital cardiac arrest patient volume affect in-hospital myocardial infarction (MI) mortality. HYPOTHESIS: Hospitals accepting cardiac arrest transfers will have increased hospital MI mortality. METHODS: MI patients (ST elevation MI [STEMI] and non-ST elevation MI [NSTEMI]) in the Acute Coronary Treatment Intervention Outcomes Network Registry were included. Hospital variation of cardiac arrest and temporal trend of the proportion of cardiac arrest MI patients were explored. Hospitals were divided into tertiles based on the proportion of cardiac arrest MI patients, and association between in-hospital mortality and hospital tertiles of cardiac arrest was compared using logistic regression adjusting for case mix. RESULTS: A total of 252 882 patients from 224 hospitals were included, of whom 9682 (3.8%) had cardiac arrest (1.6% of NSTEMI and 7.5% of STEMI patients). The proportion of MI patients who had cardiac arrest admitted to each hospital was relatively low (median 3.7% [25th, 75th percentiles: 3.0%, 4.5%]).with a range of 4.2% to 12.4% in the high-volume tertiles. Unadjusted in-hospital mortality increased with tertile: low 3.8%, intermediate 4.6%, and high 4.7% (P < 0.001); this was no longer significantly different after adjustment (intermediate vs high tertile odds ratio (OR) = 1.02; 95% confidence interval [0.90-1.16], low vs high tertile OR = 0.93 [0.83, 1.05]). CONCLUSIONS: The proportion of MI patients who have cardiac arrest is low. In-hospital mortality among all MI patients did not differ significantly between hospitals that had increased proportions of cardiac arrest MI patients. For most hospitals, overall MI mortality is unlikely to be adversely affected by treating cardiac arrest patients with MI.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kontos et al. (2018) conducted an observational in Acute Myocardial Infarction (n=252,882). High hospital proportion of MI patients with cardiac arrest vs. Low hospital proportion of MI patients with cardiac arrest was evaluated on In-hospital mortality (OR 0.93, 95% CI 0.83-1.05). A higher hospital volume of MI patients with cardiac arrest was not significantly associated with increased overall risk-adjusted in-hospital mortality compared to hospitals with lower volumes.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: