Why the study?
Does the timing of ACE inhibitor administration (early vs late) affect outcomes in patients with recent myocardial infarction?
Does the timing of ACE inhibitor administration (early vs late) affect outcomes in patients with recent myocardial infarction?
The timing of ACE inhibitor initiation after acute myocardial infarction requires careful consideration of the balance between ischemic risks and ventricular preservation.
May support ACE inhibitor use in stable post-MI patients with impaired LV function; leaves open optimal timing and mortality benefit until trials complete.
There is justifiable enthusiasm for the use of angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors in patients with heart failure. However, early after an acute myocardial infarction, the benefits (or harm) from use of these agents in individual patients may depend on the critical balance between the ischemic problem (the extent of coronary artery narrowing and risk of vessel occlusion) against the need to preserve remaining ventricular function. Patients who are hemodynamically stable without ongoing chest pain but with significantly impaired ventricular function seem likely to gain most from treatment with ACE inhibitors. Extrapolation to the acute infarct situation from the recently published trials in chronic stable heart failure may mislead, and the findings of a number of large ongoing mortality trials in patients with recent myocardial infarction are awaited.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
S. G. Bail (1993) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: