Key result
Higher baseline hemoglobin levels were associated with a decreased risk of 30-day major adverse cardiovascular events (OR 0.95) in patients with acute myocardial infarction, with a non-linear relationship and significant sex differences.
Why the study?
Women have worse outcomes after acute myocardial infarction and physiologically lower hemoglobin values, prompting examination of sex-related differences in the relationship between hemoglobin levels and adverse outcomes.
Does baseline hemoglobin level predict 30-day adverse outcomes in patients with acute myocardial infarction, and are there sex-related differences?
Cohort (n=20,559)
Yes
Does baseline hemoglobin level predict 30-day adverse outcomes in patients with acute myocardial infarction, and are there sex-related differences?
Odds Ratio: 0.95 (95% CI 0.92–0.99)
p-value: p=<0.01
Baseline hemoglobin level is an independent, non-linear predictor of 30-day adverse outcomes in AMI patients, with significant sex differences in its prognostic impact.
May inform sex-specific short-term risk stratification in AMI but should not yet change practice; leaves open causality given observational design.
Background: Women had worse outcomes after acute myocardial infarction (AMI), and physiologically, women had lower hemoglobin values. We examined whether there were sex-related differences in the relationship between hemoglobin levels and adverse outcomes in patients with acute myocardial infarction. Method: We conducted a post-hoc analysis of data from the Acute Coronary Syndrome Quality Improvement in Kerala (ACS-QUIK) Study. We explored the relationship between baseline hemoglobin level and 30-days adverse outcomes by logistic regression model, generalized additive model (GAM) and two-piecewise linear regression model. We used multiple imputation, based on five replications and a chained equation approach method in the R multiple imputation procedure, to account for missing data. The primary outcome were 30-day major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) defined as death, reinfarction, stroke, and major bleeding. The secondary outcomes were 30-day major bleeding, 30-day stroke and 30-day cardiovascular death (CVD death). Results: Twenty thousand, five hundred fifty-nine patients with AMI were included in our analysis. Baseline hemoglobin level was associated with major bleeding [OR: 0.74, 95%CI (0.60, 0.92) P < 0.01], CVD death [OR: 0.94, 95%CI (0.90, 0.99) P < 0.01], and MACEs [OR: 0.95, 95%CI (0.92, 0.99) P < 0.01]. There was no significant relationship between baseline hemoglobin level and stroke incidence in both men [OR: 1.02, 95%CI (0.90, 1.14) P = 0.77] and women [OR: 1.15, 95%CI (0.96, 1.37) P = 0.18]. Baseline hemoglobin level was associated with major bleeding [OR: 0.71, 95%CI (0.58, 0.85) P < 0.01] in male patients, however we did not find the same relationship in female patients [OR: 0.89, 95%CI (0.56, 1.41) P = 0.61]. GAM and two-piecewise linear regression model showed the relationships of hemoglobin level with major bleeding, CVD death, and MACEs were non-linear (non-linear P < 0.05), and the threshold value were 13, 14.8, and 14.3 g/dL for MACEs and CVD death, respectively. Conclusion: Baseline hemoglobin level was one of the independent predictors of prognosis in South Asia patients with acute myocardial infarction. Moreover, its impact on prognosis was largely different depending on the patients' sex.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Pei et al. (2021) conducted a cohort in Acute Myocardial Infarction (n=20,559). Baseline hemoglobin level vs. Different baseline hemoglobin levels was evaluated on 30-day major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) defined as death, reinfarction, stroke, and major bleeding (OR 0.95, 95% CI 0.92-0.99, p=<0.01). Higher baseline hemoglobin levels were associated with a decreased risk of 30-day major adverse cardiovascular events (OR 0.95) in patients with acute myocardial infarction, with a non-linear relationship and significant sex differences.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: