Key result
Reperfusion therapy significantly reduced the incidence of in-hospital cardiac rupture compared to no reperfusion (0.6% vs 3.5%, p<0.01) in patients with acute myocardial infarction.
Why the study?
Does successful reperfusion therapy reduce the incidence of cardiac rupture in patients with acute myocardial infarction?
Case-Control (n=1,296)
No
Does successful reperfusion therapy reduce the incidence of cardiac rupture in patients with acute myocardial infarction?
Successful reperfusion therapy significantly reduces the risk of in-hospital cardiac rupture, particularly late-phase rupture, in patients with acute myocardial infarction.
Reperfusion may lower cardiac rupture risk in AMI; hypothesis-generating and requires prospective validation before practice change.
BACKGROUND: Cardiac rupture after acute myocardial infarction (AMI) is unpredictable and almost always fatal, so the present study reviewed all the clinical characteristics of patients with cardiac rupture to determine if its occurrence can be predicted. METHODS AND RESULTS: The clinical characteristics of 1,296 consecutive AMI patients from January 1992 to February 2002 were retrospectively evaluated using multi-logistic analysis. Cardiac rupture occurred in 45 patients (3.5%), comprising left ventricular free wall rupture (n=23), ventricular septal perforation (n=20) and papillary muscle rupture (n=2). Early-phase rupture (within 72 h after AMI onset) was associated with anterior infarction. Of the 45 patients who experienced ruptures, 24 (53.3%) survived to discharge; 21 (46.6%) of the 45 ruptures occurred after admission. Successful reperfusion therapy was performed within 24 h for 840 patients. The incidence of rupture was significantly lower for reperfused patients than for non-reperfused patients (0.6% vs 3.5%, respectively; p<0.01). Peak C-reactive protein concentration was a reliable predictor of late-phase rupture (p=0.01), but not of early-phase rupture. CONCLUSIONS: Reperfusion therapy appears to aid in the prevention of cardiac rupture, especially late-phase rupture.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ikeda et al. (2004) conducted a case-control in Acute myocardial infarction (n=1,296). Reperfusion therapy vs. No reperfusion therapy was evaluated on Incidence of in-hospital cardiac rupture (p=<0.01). Reperfusion therapy significantly reduced the incidence of in-hospital cardiac rupture compared to no reperfusion (0.6% vs 3.5%, p<0.01) in patients with acute myocardial infarction.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: