Why the study?
To determine clinical outcomes and assess the association between cardiac rehabilitation program participation in patients with AMI after PCI.
Does cardiac rehabilitation participation reduce mortality and readmission in patients with acute myocardial infarction after percutaneous coronary intervention?
Does cardiac rehabilitation participation reduce mortality and readmission in patients with acute myocardial infarction after percutaneous coronary intervention?
Participation in cardiac rehabilitation after PCI for acute myocardial infarction is associated with reduced risks of mortality and hospital readmission.
CR participation was associated with lower mortality and readmissions post-AMI PCI; leaves open causal benefit pending randomized confirmation.
OBJECTIVES To determine clinical outcome and to nd out the association between participation of patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in cardiac rehabilitation programme. DESIGN A Prospective observational study. STUDY AREA : Department of Cardiology, Institute of Postgraduate Medical Education and Research,Kolkata. PARTICIPANTS: Patients aged ≥18 years who underwent PCI due to AMI. OUTCOME MEASURES The outcomes were subsequent myocardial infarction, revascularisation, all-cause readmission, cardiac readmission, all-cause mortality and cardiac mortality. RESULT: The data of 1107 patients were included and 60.07%% of them participated in CR program. The risks of revascularisation, all cause readmission and cardiac readmission among CR participants were compared. The results of those analysis were consistent and showed that the CR participants had lower allcause mortality ,cardiac mortality,all cause readmission, cardiac admission. However no effect was observed for subsequent myocardial infarction or revascularisation. CONCLUSIONS: It was suggested CR participation may reduce the risk of all-cause mortality ,cardiac mortality, all cause readmission and cardiac admission.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Mandal et al. (2021) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: