Why the study?
While patients without standard modifiable cardiovascular risk factors (SMuRF) have worse outcomes in type 1 acute myocardial infarction, the relationship between type 2 AMI and outcomes based on SMuRF status was unknown.
Does the absence of standard modifiable cardiovascular risk factors (SMuRF-less status) increase the risk of in-hospital all-cause mortality and adverse cardiovascular outcomes in patients hospitalized with Type 2 acute myocardial infarction?
Cohort (n=17,595)
Yes
Does the absence of standard modifiable cardiovascular risk factors (SMuRF-less status) increase the risk of in-hospital all-cause mortality and adverse cardiovascular outcomes in patients hospitalized with Type 2 acute myocardial infarction?
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Patients admitted with Type 2 AMI without standard modifiable cardiovascular risk factors (SMuRF-less) have over two-fold higher odds of in-hospital mortality, MACCE, and ischemic stroke compared to those with risk factors, highlighting a high-risk group that requires improved risk stratification and care.
BACKGROUND: Whilst it is known patients without standard modifiable cardiovascular risk factors (SMuRF; hypertension, diabetes, hypercholesterolaemia, smoking) have worse outcomes in Type 1 acute myocardial infarction (AMI), the relationship between type 2 AMI (T2AMI) and outcomes in patients with and without SMuRF is unknown. This study aimed to determine the prevalence, characteristics and clinical outcomes of patients hospitalised with T2AMI based on the presence of SMuRF. METHODS: Using the National Inpatient Sample, all hospitalizations with a primary discharge diagnosis of T2AMI were stratified according to SMuRF status (SMuRF and SMURF-less). Primary outcome was all-cause mortality while secondary outcomes were major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCE), major bleeding and ischemic stroke. Multivariable logistic regression was used to determine adjusted odds ratios (aOR) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). RESULTS: Among 17,595 included hospitalizations, 1345 (7.6%) were SMuRF-less and 16,250 (92.4%) were SMuRF. On adjusted analysis, SMuRF-less patients had increased odds of all-cause mortality (aOR 2.43, 95% CI 1.83 to 3.23), MACCE (aOR 2.32, 95% CI 1.79 to 2.90) and ischaemic stroke (aOR 2.57, 95% CI 1.56 to 4.24) compared to their SMuRF counterparts. Secondary diagnoses among both cohorts were similar, with respiratory disorders most prevalent followed by cardiovascular and renal disorders. CONCLUSIONS: T2AMI in the absence of SMuRF was associated with worse in-hospital outcomes compared to SMuRF-less patients. There was no SMuRF-based difference in the secondary diagnoses with the most common being respiratory, cardiovascular, and renal disorders. Further studies are warranted to improve overall care and outcomes of SMuRF-less patients.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sokhal et al. (2022) conducted a cohort in Type 2 acute myocardial infarction (T2AMI) (n=17,595). Absence of standard modifiable cardiovascular risk factors (SMuRF-less: no hypertension, diabetes, hypercholesterolaemia, or smoking) vs. Presence of one or more standard modifiable cardiovascular risk factors (SMuRF: hypertension, diabetes, hypercholesterolaemia, or current smoking) was evaluated on In-hospital all-cause mortality (aOR 2.43, 95% CI 1.83-3.23, p=<0.001).
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: