Key result
Assessing post-MI mortality trends in clinical trials requires understanding patient characteristics and risk factors.
Understanding the baseline risk factors and characteristics of studied populations is essential before drawing conclusions about mortality trends from clinical trials of new myocardial infarction therapies.
Clinicians must scrutinize trial populations before applying new MI therapies; leaves open accurate attribution of mortality trends to treatments.
There has been a gradual decrease in hospital mortality rate following myocardial infarction (MI) since 1950, possibly due to improved therapy. For a valid comparison of mortality rates in various countries, it will, however, be necessary to know the characteristics of the individual patient populations. Factors such as age, time of admission to the CCU, use of thrombolytic agents, patency of the infarct related artery, left ventricular ejection fraction, smoking status as well as conventional risk factors need to be assessed before a valid comparison can be made or conclusions reached concerning trends in mortality after MI. As new and effective therapy for reducing mortality in patients with infarcts are introduced such as Beta blockers, thrombolysis, aspirin, and converting enzyme inhibitors one should be cautious in drawing conclusions as to trends in mortality from the results of clinical trials of these agents until one has a clear understanding of the risk factors of the population studied. Without this information, we may be no closer to an understanding of the cause of changing trends in mortality over the next decade than to understanding the trends over the last two decades.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
B. Pitt (1989) conducted an editorial in Myocardial Infarction. Therapy for Myocardial Infarction was evaluated. Understanding patient characteristics and risk factors is essential before drawing conclusions about mortality trends following myocardial infarction from clinical trials of new therapies.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: