Why the study?
Studies of survival after myocardial infarction are often based on intention to treat analyses of controlled trials, prompting this evaluation of long-term survival in France.
Cohort (n=5,527)
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
In a French cohort of post-MI patients, 6-year mortality was 13.1%, and non-compliance with the study protocol was strongly associated with increased mortality, likely reflecting general non-compliance with secondary prevention.
BACKGROUND: Studies of survival after myocardial infarction (MI) are often based on intention to treat analyses of controlled trials. OBJECTIVES: Describe long-term survival after MI in France. METHODS: Six-year cohort study of patients recruited within 3 months after MI. Primary outcome was all-cause death. Vital status was verified in the national death registry. Analysis used Cox models with time-dependent variables and propensity scores. RESULTS: Five thousand five hundred and twenty-seven (5527) subjects were included, 62.1±13 years old, 77.6% male, 9.6% smokers, 16.7% diabetic, 13.3% with previous MI. Up to 99% of patients were initially prescribed secondary prevention drugs (aspirin and/or other antiplatelet agents, beta-blockers, statins or other lipid-lowering agents, angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers); 73% had all four classes. Overall 6-year mortality was 13.1% [95% confidence interval 12.3 to 14.0%], 2.34 per hundred patient-years (% PY); 49% returned all or all but one of the possible questionnaires (compliant [C]), 50.8% did not (non-compliant [NC]). The main predictors for death were non-compliance with study protocol (death rates NC 2.98% PY, C 1.69%PY, hazard ratio (HR) 3.13 [2.63-3.57]); increasing age at inclusion (HR up to 15.7 [10.7-23.2] for age ≥80); diabetes (1.39 [1.17-1.65]); smoking at inclusion (1.76 [1.27-2.44]), previous MI (1.46 [1.22-1.75]). Beta-blockers (0.79 [0.64-0.96]), statins (0.68 [0.51-0.90]), and enrolment in physical rehabilitation programs (0.74 [0.62-0.89]) were associated with a lower death rate. CONCLUSION: Association of mortality with non-compliance to study protocol probably indicates general non-compliance with prevention. Analyses of treatment effects were hindered by paucity of events and of unexposed patients.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Droz‐Perroteau et al. (2019) conducted a cohort in Myocardial infarction (n=5,527). Non-compliance with study protocol vs. Compliance with study protocol was evaluated on All-cause death (HR 3.13, 95% CI 2.63-3.57).
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: