Home care provision and nursing home admission after myocardial infarction in relation to cardiogenic shock and out-of-hospital cardiac arrest status

Background

Autonomy is of great importance for quality of life. There is a paucity of data on autonomy for those who survive myocardial infarction (MI) with and without cardiogenic shock (CS) and out-of-hospital arrest (OHCA).

Purpose

To examine the association between CS, OHCA, and need for home care provision or nursing home admission as a proxy for impaired autonomy in a first-time MI population.

Methods

Danish nationwide registries were used to identify patients with first-time MI (2009–2019), who prior to the event were living at home without home care and discharged alive. The patients were stratified according to CS and OHCA status. We report 1-year cumulative incidence of a composite outcome of home care provision or nursing home admission with competing risk of death and as a secondary outcome all-cause mortality. Cause specific Cox regression models were used to estimate adjusted hazard ratios (HR) with patients without CS or OHCA as reference.

Results

We identified 61,451 patients in the period with MI (by groups: −OHCA/−CS: 59,316, −OHCA/+CS: 1,597, +OHCA/−CS: 913, and +OHCA/+CS: 669). The 1-year cumulative incidences of home care/nursing home were 6.9% for patients with −OHCA/−CS, 21.1% for −OHCA/+CS, 5.2% for +OHCA/−CS, and 8.1% for those with +OHCA/+CS. With the −OHCA/−CS as reference, the adjusted HRs for home care/nursing home were 3.12 (95% CI: 2.78–3.49) for patients with −OHCA/+CS, 1.27 (95% CI: 0.95–1.70) for +OHCA/−CS, and 2.31 (95% CI: 1.76–3.03) for +OHCA/+CS (Figure). The 1-year cumulative incidences of mortality were 4.8% for patients with −OHCA/−CS, 10.0% for −OHCA/+CS, 2.8% for +OHCA/−CS, and 3.7% for those with +OHCA/+CS (adjusted HRs: 2.81 (95% CI: 2.55–3.10), 1.09 (95% CI: 0.85–1.39) and 1.81 (95% CI: 1.42–2.30) (Figure 1).

Conclusion

In a selected cohort of patients with MI, without previous need for home care/nursing home and surviving until discharge date, patients with CS were independent of OHCA status associated with less autonomy after discharge with a more than two-fold higher 1-year incidence of home care provision or nursing home admission. Further, patients with CS were associated with a two-fold higher 1-year mortality compared with MI patients without CS independent of OHCA status.

Funding Acknowledgement

Type of funding sources: Public hospital(s). Main funding source(s): The work was supported by Rigshospitalets Research Foundation, Master cabinetmaker Sophus Jacobsen and Wife Astrid Jacobsen Foundation, and Director Jacob Madsen and Wife Olga Madsens Foundation. The funding source had no role in the design, conduct, analysis, or reporting of the study.

Incidence of acute myocardial infarction-related cardiogenic shock during corona virus disease 19 (COVID-19) pandemic

Aims

The hospitalization of patients with MI has decreased during global lockdown due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Whether this decrease is associated with more severe MI, e.g. MI-CS, is unknown. We aimed to examine the association of Corona virus disease (COVID-19) pandemic and incidence of acute myocardial infarction with cardiogenic shock (MI-CS).

Methods

On March 11, 2020, the Danish government announced national lock-down. Using Danish nationwide registries, we identified patients hospitalized with MI-CS. Incidence rates (IR) and incidence rate ratios (IRR) were used to compare MI-CS before and after March 11 in 2015–2019 and in 2020.

Results

We identified 11,769 patients with MI of whom 696 (5.9%) had cardiogenic shock in 2015–2019. In 2020, 2132 MI patients were identified of whom 119 had cardiogenic shock (5.6%). The IR per 100,000 person years before March 11 in 2015–2019 was 9.2 (95% CI: 8.3–10.2) and after 8.9 (95% CI: 8.0–9.9). In 2020, the IR was 7.5 (95% CI: 5.8–9.7) before March 11 and 7.7 (95% CI: 6.0–9.9) after. The IRRs comparing the 2020-period with the 2015–2019 period before and after March 11 (lockdown) were 0.81 (95% CI: 0.59–1.12) and 0.87 (95% CI: 0.57–1.32), respectively. The IRR comparing the 2020-period during and before lockdown was 1.02 (95% CI: 0.74–1.41). No difference in 7-day mortality or in-hospital management was observed between study periods.

Conclusion

We could not identify a significant association of the national lockdown on the incidence of MI-CS, along with similar in-hospital management and mortality in patients with MI-CS.

P5012Ten-year trends and outcomes in cardiogenic shock related to first-time acute myocardial infarction: a nationwide population-based cohort study

Introduction

Despite declining incidence and mortality for acute myocardial infarction, cardiogenic shock remains a severe complication with poor in-hospital prognosis. Little is known about the temporal trends in hospitalization with acute myocardial infarction-related cardiogenic shock (AMI-CS) and the long-term prognosis.

Purpose

We aimed to investigate the hospitalization with first-time AMI-CS and subsequent 1-year mortality.

Methods

In this nationwide Danish cohort study we identified from 2005 through 2015 patients with first-time acute myocardial infarction and compared those with and without cardiogenic shock (defined by either an ICD-10 diagnosis code with cardiogenic shock and/or procedure code with inotropes or vasopressors). Patient characteristics and 1-year mortality were compared between groups using Kaplan-Meier plots and multivariable Cox regression analysis.

Results

We included 96,030 patients with acute myocardial infarction of whom 5.4% had cardiogenic shock. Median age was 69.7 years (IQR 59.0–80.1) and 37.5% were female among those without cardiogenic shock and 70.2 years (IQR 61.4–78.1) and 33.0% were female in those with cardiogenic shock. We observed no change in hospitalization with cardiogenic shock during the study period (5.45% in 2006 vs 5.54% for 2016, P for difference 0.6). One-year mortality was higher among those with cardiogenic shock relative those without (See Figure). Crude 1-year mortality risk associated with AMI decreased over time from 23.4% in 2006 vs 11.5% in 2016 (p for difference <0.0001) and this was consistent for AMI patients without CS (21.4% in 2006 vs 9.4% in 2016, p<0.0001) and patients with AMI-CS (58.1% in 2006 vs 46.2% in 2016, p<0.0001). When comparing patients with AMI-CS to those without in multivariable analysis, AMI-CS was associated with a 1-year mortality hazard ratio of 5.38 (95% CI 5.17–6.61)).

Cumulative 1-year mortality among patien

Conclusion

In a large population-based setting, this study suggests that the hospitalization for first-time AMI-CS was stable from 2005 through 2015, while mortality improved with time. However, the grave outcome related to AMI-CS remains with a 5-times higher mortality compared to AMI patients without CS.

Acknowledgement/Funding

Rigshospitalets Research Fund