Impact of oral beta-blocker therapy on mortality after primary percutaneous coronary intervention for Killip class 1 myocardial infarction

Determinants of serious in-hospital complications in patients with Killip class 1/2 ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction who underwent primary percutaneous coronary intervention

Killip classification has been used to stratify the risk of patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI). There were many reports that Killip class 3 or 4 is closely associated with poor clinical outcomes. In other words, Killip class 1 or 2 is associated with favorable clinical outcomes in patients with AMI, especially when patients received primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). However, some patients with Killip class 1/2 suffer from serious in-hospital complications. This study aimed to identify factors associated with serious in-hospital complications of ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) in patients with Killip class 1/2. The primary endpoint was serious in-hospital complications defined as the composite of in-hospital death and mechanical complications. We included 809 patients with STEMI, and divided them into the non-complication group (n = 791) and the complication group (n = 18). In-hospital death was observed in 14 patients (1.7%), and mechanical complications were observed in 4 patients (0.5%). Final TIMI flow ≤ 2 was more frequently observed in the complication group (33.3%) than in the non-complication group (5.4%) (p < 0.001). Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that serious in-hospital complication was associated with final TIMI flow grade ≤ 2 (Odds ratio 6.040, 95% confidence interval 2.042-17.870, p = 0.001). In conclusion, serious in-hospital complication of STEMI was associated with insufficient final TIMI flow grade in patients with Killip class 1/2. If final TIMI flow grade is suboptimal after primary PCI, we may recognize the potential risk of serious complications even when patients presented as Killip class 1/2.

Association of beta-blocker therapy at discharge with clinical outcomes in patients without heart failure or left ventricular systolic dysfunction after acute coronary syndrome: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Beta-blockers are the standard treatment for acute coronary syndrome (ACS) based on evidence from the prethrombolytic era. We sought to examine the effect of beta-blocker treatment on patients without heart failure or left ventricular systolic dysfunction after ACS in the contemporary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) era.

METHODS

We systematically searched PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.gov and Google Scholar for studies comparing beta-blockers versus no beta-blockers in ACS patients in the contemporary PCI era. The primary outcome was all-cause death. Pooling unadjusted and multivariable adjusted results were calculated under random-effects models.

RESULTS

Data from 15 studies (n=205,672), including 1 randomized trial, were analysed. Compared with no beta-blockers, beta-blocker therapy at discharge may reduce the risk of all-cause death (odds ratio [OR] 0.66, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.50-0.86; I²=81.9%). Subgroup analysis according to single or multicentre studies indicated similar results. Prospective studies suggested that all-cause death was less common in the beta-blocker group. After multivariable adjustment, a lower risk of all-cause death was still observed with beta-blockers (OR: 0.74, 95% CI: 0.59-0.94; I²=40.1%). No differences existed in major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), cardiac death, myocardial infarction, heart failure, revascularization or stroke, before and after multivariable adjustment.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients without heart failure or left ventricular systolic dysfunction after ACS in the contemporary PCI era, beta-blocker therapy may still be beneficial due to a potential reduced risk of all-cause death.

Long-Term Effect of β-Blocker Use on Clinical Outcomes in Postmyocardial Infarction Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background

Prior studies provided inconsistent results regarding long-term effect of β-blocker use on clinical outcomes in postmyocardial infarction (MI) patients.

Methods

We searched for articles regarding long-term effect of β-blocker use on clinical outcomes in patients after MI and published them before July 2021 in the databases as follows: PubMed, Web of Science, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Google Scholar. STATA 12.0 software was used to compute hazard ratios (HRs) and their 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

Results

The study indicated that β-blocker group had significantly lower long-term all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, major adverse cardiac events (MACEs) in post-MI patients, compared to no β-blocker group (all-cause mortality: HR, 0.67; 95% CI: 0.56–0.80; cardiovascular mortality: HR, 0.62; 95% CI: 0.49–0.78; MACE: HR, 0.87; 95% CI: 0.75–1.00). The study indicated no significant long-term effect of β-blocker use on risk of hospitalization for heart failure (HF), risk of recurrent MI, risk of stroke, and risk of repeat revascularization in post-MI patients (risk of hospitalization for HF: HR, 0.82; 95% CI: 0.58–1.16; risk of recurrent MI: HR, 0.93; 95% CI: 0.78–1.11; risk of stroke: HR, 0.94; 95% CI: 0.79–1.12; risk of repeat revascularization: HR, 0.91; 95% CI: 0.80–1.04).

Conclusions

The meta-analysis demonstrated significant long-term effects of β-blocker use on all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, and risk of MACE in post-MI patients, whereas no significant long-term effect was shown on risk of hospitalization for HF, risk of recurrent MI, risk of stroke, and risk of repeat revascularization in post-MI patients.

Prognosis of acute myocardial infarction in patients on hemodialysis stratified by Killip classification in the modern interventional era (focus on the prognosis of Killip class 1)

Cardiovascular events and death are more prevalent in hemodialysis (HD) patients than in the general population. However, a detailed prognostic risk stratification of HD patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) has not yet been performed in the modern interventional era. We examined 4509 AMI patients (89 AMI/HD and 4420 AMI/non-HD) from the Mie ACS registry and detailed prognostic analyses based on the Killip classification were performed (Cohort A). In addition, prognosis of Killip class1 AMI/HD was compared with those of 313 non-AMI/HD patients from the MIE-CARE HD study using propensity score-matching method (Cohort B). Primary endpoint was all-cause mortality for up to 2 years. All-cause death occurred in 13.0% of AMI/non-HD and 35.8% of AMI/HD during follow-up, and patients with Killip class 1 had lower 30-day and 2-year mortality than those with Killip class ≥ 2 in both AMI/non-HD and AMI/HD. Cox regression analyses identified that Killip class ≥ 2 was the strongest independent prognostic factor of 30-day mortality with a hazard ratio of 7.44 (p < 0.001), whereas both presence of HD and Killip class ≥ 2 were the independent prognostic factors of mortality for up to 2 years. In Cohort B, a propensity score-matching analysis revealed similar all-cause mortality rates between Killip class 1 AMI/HD and non-AMI/HD. In HD patients with Killip class 1 AMI, 30-day mortality was around 6%, and long-term mortality among 30-day survivors after AMI was comparable with the natural course of HD patients in the modern interventional era. Clinical trial registration: URL: https://www.umin.ac.jp/ctr/index-j.htm . UMIN000036020 and UMIN000008128.

Prognostic impacts of β-blockers in acute coronary syndrome patients without heart failure treated by percutaneous coronary intervention

BACKGROUND

The use of β-blockers for acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients without heart failure (HF) is controversial, and lacks of evidence in the era of reperfusion and intensive secondary preventions. This study aimed to investigate the prognostic impacts of β-blockers on patients with ACS but no HF treated by percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).

METHODS

A total of 2397 consecutive patients with ACS but no HF treated by PCI were retrospectively recruited from January 2010 to June 2017. Univariable Cox regression was used to assess the prognostic impacts of β-blockers, followed by adjusted analysis, one-to-one propensity score matching (PSM), and inverse probability treatment weighting (IPTW) analysis, in order to control for systemic between-group differences. The primary outcome was all-cause death.

RESULTS

Among the included patients, 2060 (85.9%) were prescribed with β-blockers at discharge. The median follow-up time was 727 (433-2016) days, with 55 (2.3%) cases of all-cause death. Unadjusted analysis showed that the use of β-blockers was associated with lower risk of death (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.42, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.23-0.76, P = 0.004), which was sustained in adjusted analysis (HR: 0.53, 95% CI: 0.29-0.98, P = 0.044), PSM analysis (HR: 0.44, 95% CI: 0.20-0.96, P = 0.039) and IPTW analysis (HR: 0.49. 95% CI: 0.35-0.70, P < 0.001). Risk reduction was also seen in β-blocker users for cardiac death, but not for major adverse cardiovascular events.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of β-blockers was associated with reduced long-term mortality for ACS-PCI patients without HF.

The selection of β-blocker after successful reperfusion in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction

Background:

The selection of β-blocker for survivors after primary intervention due to acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction seems crucial to improve the outcomes. However, rare comparison data existed for these patients. We aimed to compare the effectiveness of selective β-blockers to that of carvedilol in patients treated with primary intervention.

Methods and results:

Among the 1,485 patients in the “INTERSTELLAR” registry between 2007 and 2015, 238 patients with selective β-blockers (bisoprolol, nebivolol, atenolol, bevantolol, and betaxolol) and 988 with carvedilol were included and their clinical outcomes were compared for a 2-year observation period. In the clinical baseline characteristics, the unfavorable trends in the carvedilol group were high Killip presentation, lower ejection fractions, smaller diameters, and longer lengths of deployed stents. Although mortality (2.5% vs. 1.7%; p = 0.414) and the rate of stroke (0.8% vs. 0.6%; p = 0.693) were not different between groups, the rate of recurrent myocardial infarction (4.6% vs. 1.2%; p = 0.001) and of target vessel revascularization (4.2% vs. 0.9%; p < 0.001) were lower in the carvedilol group. After eliminating the difference by propensity matching, the similar outcome result was shown (all-cause death, 0.6% vs. 1.0%, p = 0.678; stroke, 0.6% vs. 1.2%, p = 0.479; myocardial infarction, 5.0% vs. 1.2%, p = 0.003; target vessel revascularization, 4.5% vs. 0.7%, p < 0.006) for 595 matched populations. The use of carvedilol was also determined to be an independent predictor for recurrent myocardial infarctions (hazard ratio = 0.305; p = 0.005; 95% confidence interval = 0.13-0.69).

Conclusion:

Use of a carvedilol in ST-segment myocardial infarction survivor is associated with lower recurrent myocardial infarction events. Thus, it might be the better choice of β-blocker for secondary prevention in ST-elevation myocardial infarction patients treated with primary percutaneous coronary intervention.

Effect of oral β-blocker treatment on mortality in contemporary post-myocardial infarction patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Aims

Guidelines concerning β-blocker treatment following acute myocardial infarction (AMI) are based on studies undertaken before the implementation of reperfusion and secondary prevention therapies. We aimed to estimate the effect of oral β-blockers on mortality in contemporary post-AMI patients with low prevalence of heart failure and/or reduced left ventricular ejection fraction.

Methods and results

A random effects model was used to synthetize results of 16 observational studies published between 1 January 2000 and 30 October 2017. Publication bias was evaluated, and heterogeneity between studies examined by subgroup and random effects meta-regression analyses considering patient-related and study-level variables. The pooled estimate showed that β-blocker treatment [among 164 408 (86.8%) patients, with median follow-up time of 2.7 years] was associated with a 26% reduction in all-cause mortality [rate ratio (RR) 0.74, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.64–0.85] with moderate heterogeneity (I² = 67.4%). The patient-level variable mean age of the cohort explained 31.5% of between study heterogeneity. There was presence of publication bias, or small study effect, and when controlling for bias by the trim and fill simulation method, the effect disappeared (adjusted RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.77–1.04). Also, small study effect was demonstrated by a cumulative meta-analysis starting with the largest study showing no effect, with increasing effect as the smaller studies were accumulated.

Conclusion

Evidence from this study suggests that there is no association between β-blockers and all-cause mortality. A possible beneficial effect in AMI survivors needs to be tested by large randomized clinical trials.

Current Trends for ST-segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction during the Past 5 Years in Rural Areas of China's Liaoning Province: A Multicenter Study

Background:

Since 2010, two versions of National Guidelines aimed at promoting the management of ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) have been formulated by the Chinese Society of Cardiology. However, little is known about the changes in clinical characteristics, management, and in-hospital outcomes in rural areas.

Methods:

In the present multicenter, cross-sectional study, participants were enrolled from rural hospitals located in Liaoning province in Northeast China, during two different periods (from June 2009 to June 2010 and from January 2015 to December 2015). Data collection was conducted using a standardized questionnaire. In total, 607 and 637 STEMI patients were recruited in the 2010 and 2015 cohorts, respectively.

Results:

STEMI patients in rural hospitals were older in the second group (63 years vs. 65 years, P = 0.039). We found increases in the prevalence of hypertension, prior percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), and prior stroke. Over the past 5 years, the cost during hospitalization almost doubled. The proportion of STEMI patients who underwent emergency reperfusion had significantly increased from 42.34% to 54.47% (P < 0.0001). Concurrently, the proportion of primary PCI increased from 3.62% to 10.52% (P < 0.0001). The past 5 years have also seen marked increases in the use of guideline-recommended drugs and clinical examinations. However, in-hospital mortality and major adverse cardiac events did not significantly change over time (13.01% vs. 10.20%, P = 0.121; 13.34% vs. 13.66%, P = 0.872).

Conclusions:

Despite the great progress that has been made in guideline-recommended therapies, in-hospital outcomes among rural STEMI patients have not significantly improved. Therefore, there is still substantial room for improvement in the quality of care.

Current characteristics and management of ST elevation and non-ST elevation myocardial infarction in the Tokyo metropolitan area: from the Tokyo CCU network registered cohort

Limited data exists on ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and non-STEMI (NSTEMI) managed by a well-organized cardiac care network in a metropolitan area. We analyzed the Tokyo CCU network database in 2009–2010. Of 4329 acute myocardial infarction (AMI) patients including STEMI (n = 3202) and NSTEMI (n = 1127), percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) was performed in 88.8 % of STEMI and 70.4 % of NSTEMI patients. Mean onset-to-door and door-to-balloon times in STEMI patients were shorter than those in NSTEMI patients (167 vs 233 and 60 vs 145 min, respectively, p < 0.001). Coronary artery bypass graft surgery was performed in 4.2 % of STEMI and 11.4 % of NSTEMI patients. In-hospital mortality was significantly higher in STEMI patients than NSTEMI patients (7.7 vs 5.1 %, p < 0.007). Independent correlates of in-hospital mortality were advanced age, low blood pressure, and high Killip classification, statin-treated dyslipidemia and PCI within 24 h were favorable predictors for STEMI. High Killip classification, high heart rate, and hemodialysis were significant predictors of in-hospital mortality, whereas statin-treated dyslipidemia was the only favorable predictor for NSTEMI. In conclusion, patients with MI received PCI frequently (83.5 %) and promptly (door-to-balloon time; 66 min), and had favorable in-hospital prognosis (in-hospital mortality; 7.0 %). In addition to traditional predictors of in-hospital death, statin-treated dyslipidemia was a favorable predictor of in-hospital mortality for STEMI and NSTEMI patients, whereas hemodialysis was the strongest predictor for NSTEMI patients.

Effects of liraglutide, a glucagon-like peptide-1 analog, on left ventricular remodeling assessed by cardiac magnetic resonance imaging in patients with acute myocardial infarction undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention

The clinical efficacy of glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) analogs in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) is uncertain. The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the effects of the GLP-1 analog liraglutide on left ventricular (LV) remodeling in patients with AMI. We retrospectively evaluated the effects of liraglutide on LV remodeling assessed by cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMRI) in 15 patients with type 2 diabetes who were successfully treated with primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for AMI. Patients were divided into two groups based on their hypoglycemic medication: liraglutide use (group L; n = 6) or standard therapy (group S; n = 9). The CMRI findings in the early phase and at the 6-month follow-up were compared. At the 6-month follow-up, group S showed increases in LV end-diastolic (from 64 to 74 mL/m(2), p = 0.08) and end-systolic (from 38 to 45 mL/m(2), p = 0.13) volume indexes, whereas no such increase was observed in group L. The LV mass index (LVMI) was significantly smaller in group L than in group S at baseline (64 vs. 75 g/m(2), p = 0.05) and at follow-up (56 vs. 78 g/m(2), p = 0.009). Multivariate regression analysis showed that liraglutide use was an independent negative predictor of LVMI (β = -0.720, p = 0.003). In conclusion, liraglutide may be able to prevent the progression of LV remodeling and is associated with a lower LV mass in diabetic patients with AMI undergoing primary PCI.

Does reducing ischemia time justify to catheterize firstly the culprit artery in every primary PCI?

No consensus exists about which coronary artery should be firstly catheterized in primary PCIs. Initial catheterization of the "culprit artery" could reduce reperfusion time. However, complete knowledge of coronary anatomy could modify revascularization strategy. The objective of the study was to analyze this issue in ST-elevation myocardial infarction patients undergoing primary PCI. PCIs were performed in 384 consecutive patients. Choice of ipsilateral approach (IA): starting with a guiding catheter for the angiography and PCI of the "culprit artery", or contralateral approach (CA): starting with a diagnostic catheter for the "non-culprit artery" and completing the angiography and PCI of the culprit with a guiding catheter was left to the operator. Differences between two approaches regarding reperfusion time, acute events or revascularization strategies were analyzed. There were no differences between two approaches regarding reperfusion time or clinical events. When the left coronary artery was responsible, IA was more frequent (76.4 vs 22.6 %), but when it was the right coronary artery, CA was preferred (20 vs 80 %); p < 0.0001. With CA, bare metal stents (BMS) were more used than drug eluting (DES) (60.8 vs 39.2 %) inversely than with IA (BMS 41.3 vs DES 59.7 %; p < 0.0001). With CA there were more patients with left main or multivessel disease in which revascularization was completed with non-urgent surgery (4.13 vs 2.4 %, p < 0.0001). Initial CA does not involve higher reperfusion time. Furthermore, overall knowledge of coronary anatomy offers more options in revascularization strategy and may imply a change in management. Despite the need to individualize each case, contralateral approach may be the first option with the exception of unstable patients.