Why the study?
What are the risk factors for early death and late cardiac events in patients undergoing emergency CABG for acute myocardial infarction?
What are the risk factors for early death and late cardiac events in patients undergoing emergency CABG for acute myocardial infarction?
Intraoperative hANP and postoperative ARB and aldosterone blockers may improve long-term prognosis and reduce late cardiac events following emergency CABG for AMI by inhibiting left ventricular remodeling.
High-risk features predict late events after emergency CABG for AMI; hypothesis-generating for hANP, ARB, and aldosterone blocker use but should not yet change practice.
BACKGROUND: The results of emergency coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) for acute myocardial infarction (AMI) are less than satisfactory, and readmission for cardiac events is common. METHODS AND RESULTS: 105 patients underwent emergency CABG for AMI. We examined the long-term results of emergency CABG for AMI from the viewpoints of preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative factors. The operative mortality rate was 11.4%. Risk factors for early death were age ≥80 years, shock, veno-arterial bypass, creatine kinase isoenzyme Mb ≥100 U/L, non-use of a left internal thoracic artery graft and an extracorporeal circulation time ≥120 min. Risk factors for late cardiac events were ejection fraction <40%, non-use of human atrial natriuretic peptide (hANP) therapy, angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARB) and aldosterone blockers, and a 3-month postoperative brain natriuretic peptide level ≥200 pg/ml. CONCLUSIONS: Early results of this study are similar to those seen in previous reports, whereas late phase results yield some new and interesting findings. We suggest that intraoperative hANP, and postoperative aldosterone blocker and ARB, following CABG for AMI, will, through control of the renin-angiotensin-aldsterone system, inhibit left ventricular remodelling, reduce the extent of infarction, and improve cardiac function, yielding a favourable long-term prognosis.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sezai et al. (2012) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 2 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: