Defining high-risk patients with ST-segment elevation acute myocardial infarction undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention: A comparison among different scoring systems and clinical definitions

Intracoronary antithrombotic therapy during primary percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with STEMI: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

The efficacy of intracoronary (IC) antithrombotic therapy, which may best prevent the no-reflow phenomenon during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), remains unclear. Therefore, we compared the efficacy and safety of different IC antithrombotic agents.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) compared IC fibrinolytic agents (recombinant tissue plasminogen activators [rtPAs] and non-rtPAs) or glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors (small molecules and monoclonal antibodies) with placebo by searching the relevant studies published before September 21, 2022. Bayesian network meta-analyses were performed using random-effects models.

RESULTS

Twenty-five RCTs with 4546 patients were included. Non-rtPAs and small molecules were significantly more effective in achieving thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI) grade 3 flow than placebo (odds ratio [OR] 2.28, 95 % credible intervals [CrI] 1.24-4.13; OR 2.06, 95 % CrI 1.17-3.46). Moreover, these agents' efficacy was observed in other microcirculation-related outcomes, including TIMI myocardial perfusion grade 3, complete ST-segment resolution, and corrected TIMI frame counts. Within 6 months, small molecules were associated with both an improved left ventricular ejection fraction (MD 3.90, 95 % CrI 0.48-7.46) and major adverse cardiac events (MACE) reduction (OR 0.36, 95 % CrI 0.20-0.61). Non-rtPAs demonstrated a reduced MACE incidence within 6 months (OR 0.51, 95 % CrI 0.31-0.81). The results were consistent in the subgroup with a total ischemic time > 6 h. No significant differences in mortality or bleeding events were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

IC non-rtPAs and small molecules may be effective for adjunctive therapy to PCI, particularly in patients with longer ischemia periods.

Stable STEMI patients rarely require intensive-care level therapy after primary PCI

Background

The disposition of patients presenting with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) is commonly the coronary care unit. Recent studies have suggested that low-risk STEMI patients could be managed in a lower-acuity setting immediately after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). We sought to determine the frequency of downstream intensive-care therapy used in our “stable” STEMI patients post-PCI.

Methods

A single-centre, retrospective review was completed of consecutive patients who underwent primary PCI for STEMI between 2013 and 2016. Post-PCI, patients were defined as being stable if they had not required intensive-care therapy or suffered significant complications. Intensive-care therapies and complications were defined as invasive/noninvasive ventilation, pacing, cardiac arrest, use of vasopressors/inotropes, dialysis, stroke, or major bleeding. This group of stable patients had their course followed to discharge.

Results

A total of 731 patients presented with STEMI for primary PCI. Of these, 132 patients (18%) required intensive-care therapies and/or had complications prior to PCI and were excluded. After PCI, 599 STEMI patients (82%) were defined as stable, according to the above definition. Of these, 11 patients (1.8%) required intensive-care therapies during their hospitalization. Zwolle scores were significantly higher in patients with complications (6.3 ± 4.4 vs 2.0 ± 1.5, P < 0.0001). The most frequent intensive-care complications and therapies were cardiac arrest (7 patients, 1%) and vasopressor use (4 patients, 0.7%). These complications most frequently occurred on the first admission day (6 patients, 1%).

Conclusions

Patients who are stable at the completion of their primary PCI rarely develop complications that require intensive care. These patients are easily identified for triage to a lower-acuity setting, alleviating congestion in cardiac care units and reducing hospitalization costs.

Intensive care use and mortality among patients with ST elevation myocardial infarction: retrospective cohort study

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effect of intensive care unit (ICU) admission on mortality among patients with ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI).

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

1727 acute care hospitals in the United States.

PARTICIPANTS

Medicare beneficiaries (aged 65 years or older) admitted with STEMI to either an ICU or a non-ICU unit (general/telemetry ward or intermediate care) between January 2014 and October 2015.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

30 day mortality. An instrumental variable analysis was done to account for confounding, using as an instrument the additional distance that a patient with STEMI would need to travel beyond the closest hospital to arrive at a hospital in the top quarter of ICU admission rates for STEMI.

RESULTS

The analysis included 109 375 patients admitted to hospital with STEMI. Hospitals in the top quarter of ICU admission rates admitted 85% or more of STEMI patients to an ICU. Among patients who received ICU care dependent on their proximity to a hospital in the top quarter of ICU admission rates, ICU admission was associated with lower 30 day mortality than non-ICU admission (absolute decrease 6.1 (95% confidence interval -11.9 to -0.3) percentage points). In a separate analysis among patients with non-STEMI, a group for whom evidence suggests that routine ICU care does not improve outcomes, ICU admission was not associated with differences in mortality (absolute increase 1.3 (-0.9 to 3.4) percentage points).

CONCLUSIONS

ICU care for STEMI is associated with improved mortality among patients who could be treated in an ICU or non-ICU unit. An urgent need exists to identify which patients with STEMI benefit from ICU admission and what about ICU care is beneficial.

Accuracy of dedicated risk scores in patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention in daily clinical practice

BACKGROUND

Comparisons between dedicated risk scores in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (pPCI) in real-world clinical practice are scarce. The aim of this study was to assess the diagnostic performance of the Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events (GRACE), Primary Angioplasty in Myocardial Infarction (PAMI), Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI), and Zwolle scores in STEMI patients undergoing pPCI in contemporary clinical practice.

METHODS

This was a prospective cohort study of consecutive patients with STEMI undergoing pPCI between December 2009 and November 2010 in a high-volume tertiary referral centre. The outcomes assessed were major cardiovascular events (MACEs) and death within 30 days. The diagnostic accuracy of the scores was assessed using receiver operating characteristic curves, and scores were compared using the DeLong method.

RESULTS

During the study period, 501 patients were included. Within 30 days, 62 patients (12.4%) presented a MACE and 39 individuals (7.8%) died. All scores were statistically associated with death and MACE within 30 days (P < 0.01). The c-statistic and 95% confidence intervals for 30-day mortality were: GRACE, 0.84 (0.78-0.90); TIMI, 0.81 (0.74-0.87); Zwolle, 0.80 (0.73-0.87); and PAMI, 0.75 (0.68-0.82) (P < 0.01). There was no statistically significant difference regarding the accuracy of the TIMI, GRACE, and Zwolle scores for 30-day mortality, but the GRACE score was superior to the PAMI score (P < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

The TIMI, GRACE, and Zwolle scores performed equally well as predictors of mortality in patients who underwent pPCI in current practice. These results suggest that these scores are suitable options for risk assessment in a real-world setting.