Two-year outcomes of statin therapy in patients with acute myocardial infarction with or without dyslipidemia after percutaneous coronary intervention in the era of new-generation drug-eluting stents within Korean population: Data from the Korea Acute Myocardial Infarction Registry

Effectiveness of lipid-lowering therapy on mortality and major adverse cardiovascular event outcomes in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: a network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Emergency percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) can quickly restore myocardial perfusion after acute coronary syndrome. Whether and which lipid-lowering regimens are effective in reducing major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) and mortality risk after PCI remain unclear.

OBJECTIVE

This study assessed the benefits of different lipid-lowering regimens on the risk of MACEs and mortality in the post-PCI population by network meta-analysis.

METHODS

Public databases, including PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Library, were searched from inception to August 2022. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) on lipid-lowering regimens in post-PCI populations were included and analysed. The outcomes were the incidence of all-cause mortality and MACEs, whether reported as dichotomous variables or as HRs.

RESULTS

Thirty-nine RCTs were included. For MACEs, alirocumab plus rosuvastatin (OR: 0.18; 95% CI: 0.07 to 0.44), evolocumab plus ezetimibe and statins (OR: 0.19; 95% CI: 0.06 to 0.59), eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) plus pitavastatin (HR: 0.67; 95% CI: 0.49 to 0.96) and icosapent ethyl plus statins (HR: 0.73; 95% CI: 0.62 to 0.86) had significant advantages and relatively high rankings. For mortality, rosuvastatin (OR: 0.30; 95% CI: 0.11 to 0.84), ezetimibe plus statins (OR: 0.55; 95% CI: 0.43 to 0.89) and icosapent ethyl plus statins (OR: 0.66; 95% CI: 0.45 to 0.96) had significant advantages compared with the control.

CONCLUSION

EPA, especially icosapent ethyl, plus statins had a beneficial effect on reducing the risk of MACEs and mortality in post-PCI patients. Proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type-9 inhibitors plus statins were able to reduce the risk of MACEs, but the risk of mortality remained unclear.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42018099600.

Comparative effect of statin intensity between prediabetes and type 2 diabetes mellitus after implanting newer-generation drug-eluting stents in Korean acute myocardial infarction patients: a retrospective observational study

Background

Comparative studies regarding the long-term clinical outcomes of statin intensity between acute myocardial infarction (AMI) patients with prediabetes and those with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), after successful implantation of newer-generation drug-eluting stents (DES) with statin treatment, are limited. We compared the 2-year clinical outcomes between these patients.

Methods

A total of 11,612 AMI patients were classified as statin users (n = 9893) and non-users (n = 1719). Thereafter, statin users were further divided into high-intensity (n = 2984) or low-moderate-intensity statin (n = 6909) treatment groups. Those in these two groups were further classified into patients with normoglycemia, prediabetes, and T2DM. The major outcomes were the occurrence of major adverse cardiac events (MACE), defined as all-cause death, recurrent myocardial infarction (Re-MI), or any repeat coronary revascularization.

Results

After adjusting for both high-intensity and low-moderate-intensity statin users, the cumulative incidences of MACE (p = 0.737, p = 0.062, respectively), all-cause death, Re-MI, and any repeat revascularization were similar between the prediabetes and T2DM groups. In the total study population, both high-intensity and low-moderate-intensity statin treatments showed comparable results. However, in the patients who enrolled after October 2012, the cumulative incidences of MACE (aHR 1.533; 95% CI 1.144–2.053; p = 0.004) and any repeat revascularization (aHR, 1.587; 95% CI 1.026–2.456; p = 0.038) were significantly lower in high-intensity statin users than in low-moderate intensity statin users. The beneficial effects of high-intensity compared to low-moderate-intensity statin therapy were more apparent in the normoglycemia group than hyperglycemia group, as it reduced the cumulative incidences of MACE (aHR 1.903; 95% CI 1.203–3.010; p = 0.006) and any repeat revascularization (aHR 3.248; 95% CI 1.539–6.854; p = 0.002).

Conclusions

In this retrospective registry study, prediabetes and T2DM groups showed comparable clinical outcomes, after administering both high-intensity and low-moderate-intensity statin treatments. However, these results are likely to be clearly proved by further studies, especially in patients with AMI who are being treated in contemporary practice.

Trial registration

Retrospectively registered.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12872-021-02198-w.

Effects of stent generation on clinical outcomes after acute myocardial infarction compared between prediabetes and diabetes patients

We investigated the effects of stent generation on 2-year clinical outcomes between prediabetes and diabetes patients after acute myocardial infarction (AMI). A total of 13,895 AMI patients were classified into normoglycemia (group A: 3673), prediabetes (group B: 5205), and diabetes (group C: 5017). Thereafter, all three groups were further divided into first-generation (1G)-drug-eluting stent (DES) and second-generation (2G)-DES groups. Patient-oriented composite outcomes (POCOs) defined as all-cause death, recurrent myocardial infarction (Re-MI), and any repeat revascularization were the primary outcome. Stent thrombosis (ST) was the secondary outcome. In both prediabetes and diabetes groups, the cumulative incidences of POCOs, any repeat revascularization, and ST were higher in the 1G-DES than that in the 2G-DES. In the diabetes group, all-cause death and cardiac death rates were higher in the 1G-DES than that in the 2G-DES. In both stent generations, the cumulative incidence of POCOs was similar between the prediabetes and diabetes groups. However, in the 2G-DES group, the cumulative incidences of Re-MI and all-cause death or MI were significantly higher in the diabetes group than that in the prediabetes group. To conclude, 2G-DES was more effective than 1G-DES in reducing the primary and secondary outcomes for both prediabetes and diabetes groups.

In-hospital outcomes after percutaneous coronary interventions in cardiac allograft recipients

Introduction

The average age and survival of heart transplant recipients have improved significantly over the last 10 years. In these long-term survivors, coronary allograft vasculopathy is one of the most common causes of death. There is a paucity of large-data research highlighting the short-term outcomes of percutaneous coronary interventions in cardiac allograft recipients.

Methods

We compared the in-hospital outcomes of heart transplant recipient and non-transplant recipients following percutaneous coronary intervention using data from the National inpatient sample (NIS). All adult patients (age ⩾ 18 years) who had percutaneous coronary intervention in the index admissions from January of 2005 to December of 2014 were included in the analysis. They were then divided into two groups based on their heart transplant status. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes were stroke, cardiac arrest, duration of hospitalization, and total hospital charges. Logistic regression models were used to compare in-hospital outcomes between the two groups.

Results

Of 1,316,528 patients who had percutaneous coronary intervention, 618 (0.05%) were heart transplant recipients and 1,315,910 (99.95%) were not. The heart transplant recipient group was significantly younger with lower rates of obesity and peripheral vascular disease but higher rate of chronic kidney disease, iron deficiency anemia, and chronic liver disease. There was significantly higher in-hospital mortality in transplant recipients below 65 years of age (adjusted odds ration = 2.3, p value < 0.0001). Subjects in the heart transplant recipient group also had longer hospital stays (p value = 0.002).

Conclusion

Heart transplant recipients younger than 65 years had higher in-hospital mortality. Subjects in the heart transplant recipient group were also younger and had longer duration of hospitalization than the non-transplant cohorts.

Effect of statin treatment in patients with acute myocardial infarction with prediabetes and type 2 diabetes mellitus: A retrospective observational registry study

ABSTRACT

Studies comparing long-term clinical outcomes of statin treatment between acute myocardial infarction (AMI) patients with prediabetes and those with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) after successful percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with the newer-generation drug-eluting stents (DESs) are limited. We compared 2-year clinical outcomes between these patients.A total of 11,962 AMI patients were classified as statin users (n = 10,243) and statin nonusers (n = 1719). Thereafter, statin users and nonusers were further divided into the normoglycemia, prediabetes, and T2DM groups. The major outcome was the occurrence of major adverse cardiac event (MACE) defined as all-cause death, recurrent myocardial infarction (Re-MI), or any repeat coronary revascularization.After statin treatment, the cumulative incidences of MACE (P = .314), all-cause death, cardiac death (CD), Re-MI, and any repeat revascularization were similar between the prediabetes and T2DM groups. However, the cumulative incidences of MACE (P = .025) and all-cause death (P = .038) in the prediabetes group and those of MACE (P = .001), all-cause death (P = .009), and CD (P = .048) in the T2DM group were significantly higher than those in the normoglycemia group. Moreover, in all the 3 glycemic groups, the cumulative incidences of MACE, all-cause death, and CD were significantly higher among statin nonusers than among statin users.This study revealed that AMI patients with prediabetes had worse clinical outcomes than those with normoglycemia and comparable to those with T2DM after 2-year statin treatment. However, further studies are warranted to confirm the current findings.

Comparison of clinical outcomes between angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitors and ARBs in patients with acute myocardial infarction with dyslipidemia after a successful stent implantation

OBJECTIVE

Currently, there are limited comparative data concerning long-term major clinical outcomes following the angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and angiotensin II type 1 (AT1) receptor blockers (ARBs) therapy in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) with dyslipidemia after a successful stent implantation. Therefore, we investigated major clinical outcomes for 2 years following the ACEIs and ARBs therapy in these patients.

METHODS

A total of 3015 patients with AMI who underwent a successful stent implantation and were prescribed ACEIs (n=2175) or ARBs (n=840) were enrolled into the study from the Korea AMI Registry (KAMIR). The major clinical endpoint was the occurrence of major adverse cardiac events (MACEs) defined as all-cause death, recurrent myocardial infarction (Re-MI), and any repeat-revascularization-comprised target lesion revascularization (TLR), target vessel revascularization (TVR), and non-TVR.

RESULTS

After the adjustment, the cumulative incidence of all-cause death in the ARBs group was significantly higher than in the ACEIs group [adjusted hazard ratio (aHR), 2.277; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.154-4.495; p=0.018]. The cumulative incidences of MACEs (aHR, 1.305; 95% CI, 0.911-1.869; p=0.146), cardiac death, Re-MI, any repeat revascularization, TLR, TVR, and non-TVR were similar between the two groups. In addition, an advanced age (≥65 years), decreased left ventricular ejection fraction (&lt;50&percnt;), and cardiopulmonary resuscitation on admission were meaningful independent predictors for all-cause death in this study.

CONCLUSION

ACEIs were a preferred treatment modality when compared to ARBs for patients with AMI with dyslipidemia who underwent a successful stent implantation to reduce the incidences of all-cause death during a 2-year follow-up. However, additional research is required to determine the clinical implications of these results.

Impacts of renin-angiotensin system inhibitors on two-year clinical outcomes in diabetic and dyslipidemic acute myocardial infarction patients after a successful percutaneous coronary intervention using newer-generation drug-eluting stents

This study investigated the impacts of renin-angiotensin system inhibitors (RASIs) on 2-year clinical outcomes in diabetes and dyslipidemic acute myocardial infarction (AMI) patients after a successful percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) using newer-generation drug-eluting stents (DESs).A total of 16,997 AMI patients were enrolled, and divided into four groups based on the presence or absence of diabetes and dyslipidemia as follows: diabetes -/dyslipidemia -(group A, 11,132 patients), diabetes +/dyslipidemia - (group B, 3,860 patients), diabetes -/dyslipidemia + (group C, 1,328 patients), and diabetes +/dyslipidemia + (group D, 677 patients). The clinical endpoint was the occurrence of major adverse cardiac events (MACEs), the composite of total death, recurrent myocardial infarction (re-MI), and any repeat revascularization, including target lesion revascularization (TLR), target vessel revascularization (TVR), and non-target vessel revascularization (non-TVR).After RASIs therapy, the cumulative incidences of MACEs (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 1.330; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.022-1.732; P = .034), any repeat revascularization (aHR, 1.584; 95% CI, 1.092-2.298; P = .015), TLR, and TVR were significantly higher in group B than group C. However, the cumulative incidences of all-cause death, cardiac death, re-MI, and non-TVR were similar in groups B and C.In this study, under the newer-generation DESs era, repeat revascularization rate reduction benefit of RASIs therapy in diabetic AMI patients was lesser than that in dyslipidemic AMI patients. However, larger randomized controlled studies are needed to confirm these results in the future.

Culprit-only versus multivessel or complete versus incomplete revascularization in patients with non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction and multivessel disease who underwent successful percutaneous coronary intervention using newer-generation drug-eluting stents

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The long-term comparative results between culprit-only percutaneous coronary intervention (C-PCI) and multivessel PCI (M-PCI) or those between complete revascularization (CR) and incomplete revascularization (IR) in patients with non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) and multivessel disease (MVD) after successful newer-generation drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation are limited. Therefore, we compared the 2-year clinical outcomes in such patients.

METHODS

A total of 4588 patients with NSTEMI and MVD (C-PCI, n = 2055; M-PCI, n = 2533; CR, n = 2029; IR, n = 504) were evaluated. The primary outcome was major adverse cardiac events (MACEs) defined as all-cause death, recurrent myocardial infarction MI, and any repeat coronary revascularization. The secondary outcome was stent thrombosis (ST).

RESULTS

The cumulative incidences of the primary and secondary outcomes were similar in the three comparison groups (C-PCI vs. M-PCI, CR vs. IR, or CR vs. C-PCI). However, the cumulative incidence of non-target vessel revascularization (non-TVR) was higher in the C-PCI group than in the M-PCI group (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR]: 2.011; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.942-3.985; p = 0.012), higher in the IR group than in the CR group (aHR: 2.051; 95% CI: 1.216-4.183; p = 0.043), and higher in the C-PCI group than in the CR group (aHR: 2.099; 95% CI: 1.237-3.564; p = 0.006).

CONCLUSIONS

Regarding the higher cumulative incidence of non-TVR, M-PCI and CR were preferred compared to C-PCI or IR in patients with NSTEMI and MVD. However, further randomized studies are required to confirm these findings.

Different Statin Effects of ST-elevation Versus Non-ST-Elevation Acute Myocardial Infarction After Stent Implantation

BACKGROUND

Intensive statin therapy reduces cardiovascular events in acute coronary syndrome. The data concerning the long-term clinical impacts of statin therapy between ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and non-STEMI (NSTEMI) after drug-eluting stent implantation are limited. We compared the 2-year clinical outcomes between these 2 groups after statin therapy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 30,616 Korean patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) were enrolled. Among them, 13,686 patients were classified as group A (STEMI statin user), 3,824 patients were as group B (STEMI statin nonuser), 10,398 patients were as group C (NSTEMI statin user), and 2,708 patients were as group D (NSTEMI statin nonuser). The major clinical endpoint was the occurrence of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) defined as all-cause death, recurrent myocardial infarction (re-MI), and any repeat revascularization during a 2-year follow-up period.

RESULTS

After adjustment, the cumulative risks of MACE (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] = 1.112 [1.002-1.235]; P = 0.047), all-cause death (aHR = 1.271 [1.054-1.532]; P = 0.012), and target vessel revascularization (TVR, aHR = 1.262 [1.049-1.518]; P = 0.014) in group C were significantly higher than group A. The cumulative risks of MACE, all-cause death, and cardiac death of the statin nonuser group (groups B and D) were significantly higher compared with statin user group (groups A and C).

CONCLUSIONS

Statin therapy was more effective in reducing the cumulative risks of MACE, all-cause death, and TVR in the STEMI group than NSTEMI group in Korean patients with AMI after successful drug-eluting stent implantation.

Comparison of the Major Clinical Outcomes for the Use of Endeavor® and Resolute Integrity® Zotarolimus-Eluting Stents During a Three-Year Follow-up

Background

Endeavor®-zotarolimus-eluting stent (E-ZES) was the first ZES to be developed, and Resolute integrity®-ZES (I-ZES) has been developed more recently. Comparative studies on long-term usage of these two ZESs have been rare.

Objectives

The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of E-ZES and I-ZES during a long-term follow-up of patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).

Methods

A total of 767 patients who underwent PCI with E-ZES or I-ZES were eligible for this study. The primary endpoint was the occurrence of major adverse cardiac events (MACEs), defined as the composite of all-cause death, non-fatal myocardial infarction (MI), and any repeat revascularization. The secondary endpoint was stent thrombosis (ST).

Results

After propensity score-matched (PSM) analysis, two PSM groups (193 pairs, n = 386, C-statistic = 0.824) were generated. During the 3-year follow-up period, the cumulative incidence of MACEs (hazard ratio [HR], 0.837; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.464-1.508; p = 0.553) and ST (HR, 0.398; 95% CI, 0.077-2.052; p = 0.271) was similar for the E-ZES and I-ZES groups. Additionally, the cumulative incidences of all-cause death, cardiac death, non-fatal MI, and any repeat revascularization were not significantly different between the two groups.

Conclusions

Although I-ZES utilizes a more advanced stent platform, stent design, and polymer system than E-ZES, both the ZESs showed comparable efficacy and safety during the 3-year follow-up period in this single-center, all-comers registry. However, further large-scaled, randomized, well-controlled trials with long-term follow-up are needed to verify these results.

Which is the worst risk factor for the long-term clinical outcome? Comparison of long-term clinical outcomes between antecedent hypertension and diabetes mellitus in South Korean acute myocardial infarction patients after stent implantation

BACKGROUND

Hypertension and diabetes mellitus (DM) are major risk factors for the cardiovascular disease. In this retrospective cohort study, we compared the long-term clinical outcomes between antecedent hypertension and DM in acute myocardial infarction (AMI) patients after stent implantation.

METHODS

A total of 32 938 eligible AMI patients were enrolled and divided into the four groups according to the presence or absence of hypertension and DM (hypertension -/DM -[group A, 13 773 patients], hypertension +/DM -[group B, 10 395 patients], hypertension -/DM + [group C, 3050 patients], and hypertension +/DM + [group D, 5720 patients]). The clinical endpoint was the cumulative incidence of major adverse cardiac events (MACEs) defined as all-cause death, recurrent myocardial infarction (Re-MI) and any repeat revascularization during the 2-year follow-up period.

RESULTS

After adjustment, the cumulative incidence of MACEs (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 1.232; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.982-1.567; P = .071), all-cause death, and e-MI Re-MI were similar between the group B and C. However, the cumulative incidences of any repeat revascularization (aHR, 1.438; 95% CI, 1.062-1.997; P = .007), target lesion revascularization (TLR) (aHR, 2.467; 95% CI, 1.552-3.922; P < .001), and target vessel revascularization (TVR) (aHR, 1.671; 95% CI, 1.256-2.222; P < .001) were significantly higher in group C compared with group B.

CONCLUSIONS

This large number of a nonrandomized and multicenter cohort study clearly demonstrated the detrimental impacts of the hypertension and diabetes on long-term clinical outcomes. Moreover, higher incidence of repeat revascularization after PCI in diabetic AMI patients a major concern until recently.