Key result
Prior use of ACEI/ARB/beta-blockers before acute myocardial infarction did not significantly reduce in-hospital mortality (3.54% vs 2.88%, p=0.64) but was associated with improved heart function and smaller infarct size.
Why the study?
Data evaluating the effect of ACEI, ARB, or beta-blocker use prior to acute myocardial infarction on major adverse cardiovascular events in Chinese patients were limited.
Does prior treatment with ACEI/ARB/β-blockers improve in-hospital outcomes in patients presenting with acute myocardial infarction?
Observational (n=2,705)
No
Does prior treatment with ACEI/ARB/β-blockers improve in-hospital outcomes in patients presenting with acute myocardial infarction?
Absolute Event Rate: 3.54% vs 2.88%
p-value: p=0.64
Prior use of ACEI/ARB/beta-blockers before an acute myocardial infarction does not reduce in-hospital mortality but is associated with smaller infarct size and better heart function.
Pre-AMI AAβ use was associated with smaller infarcts and better function but similar MACE; leaves open whether pretreatment confers net benefit in broader populations.
BACKGROUND: Current guidelines recommend angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitors (ACEI) or angiotensin-receptor blockers (ARB) or β-blockers (β-B) for secondary prevention in patients after an acute myocardial infarction (AMI). However, there is limited data to evaluate ACEI/ARB/β-B (AAβ) used before AMI on major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), in China patients. OBJECTIVES: This study sought to investigate whether AAβ treatment prior to AMI is associated with better hospital outcomes at the onset of AMI. METHODS: A total of 2705 patients were selected from the Cardiovascular Center Beijing Friendship Hospital Database Bank, and divided into two groups on the basis of admission prescription: AAβ (n = 872) or no-AAβ (n = 1833). The study was also designed using propensity-score matching (226 AAβ treated patients vs 452 no-AAβ treated patients). The primary outcome was a composite of cardiac death and heart function and infarct size during hospitalization follow-up. RESULTS: The mean follow-up period was about 8 days in MACE. The Cox model showed the two groups had similar risk of cardiac death. The in-hospital mortality was 3.36% (3.33% of AAβ users and 3.38% of nonusers, p = 0.94). In adjusted analysis, there was still no difference in in-hospital mortality between the two groups (3.54% vs 2.88%, p = 0.64). However, the AAβ treated patients were associated with better heart function and smaller infarct size than the no-AAβ treated patients. CONCLUSIONS: The in-hospital MACE was similar between AAβ treated patients and no-AAβ treated patients. However, treatment with AAβ before AMI was associated with improved heart function and smaller infarct size.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Gong et al. (2018) conducted an observational in Acute myocardial infarction (n=2,705). ACEI/ARB/beta-blockers (AAβ) vs. No AAβ was evaluated on In-hospital mortality (adjusted analysis) (p=0.64). Prior use of ACEI/ARB/beta-blockers before acute myocardial infarction did not significantly reduce in-hospital mortality (3.54% vs 2.88%, p=0.64) but was associated with improved heart function and smaller infarct size.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: