Why the study?
Does hormone replacement therapy improve in-hospital survival in postmenopausal women after myocardial infarction?
Does hormone replacement therapy improve in-hospital survival in postmenopausal women after myocardial infarction?
Postmenopausal hormone therapy is associated with reduced in-hospital mortality after myocardial infarction, though this finding may be confounded by selection and adherence biases.
Should not yet change HRT practice post-MI; leaves open a possible survival benefit pending randomized confirmation.
BACKGROUND: Although postmenopausal hormone therapy (HRT) commonly is used in hope of preventing coronary heart disease, the effect of HRT on case fatality of myocardial infarction has never been studied. We evaluated HRT as a predictor of survival after MI in postmenopausal women. METHODS AND RESULTS: The present study was performed with 114 724 women of age >/=55 years with confirmed myocardial infarction who presented between April 1998 and January 2000 to 1 of 1674 hospitals participating in the National Registry of Myocardial Infarction-3. Presenting characteristics, treatment, and clinical outcome data were obtained by chart review. At time of hospitalization, 7353 (6.4%) women reported current use of HRT, defined as use of estrogen, progestin, or estrogen/progestin for reasons other than contraception. Unadjusted mortality was 7.4% in users of HRT and 16.2% in nonusers (odds ratio 0.41, 95% confidence interval 0.36 to 0.43). After adjustments were made for prior medical history, clinical characteristics, treatments received in-hospital, and likelihood of receiving HRT, HRT remained associated with an improved rate of survival (odds ratio 0.65, 95% confidence interval 0.59 to 0.72). Significant association of HRT with decreased mortality after myocardial infarction was observed in all age strata. CONCLUSIONS: Postmenopausal HRT appears to be associated with reduced mortality after myocardial infarction. This finding could be caused by therapeutic effect of HRT, selection and adherence bias, or some combination of both.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Shlipak et al. (2001) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: