Trends in ST-elevation myocardial infarction hospitalization among young adults: a binational analysis

BACKGROUND

ST-segment myocardial infarction (STEMI) is typically associated with increased age, but there is an important group of patients who suffer from STEMI under the age of 50 who are not well characterized in studies.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We analysed results from Myocardial Ischemia National Audit Project (MINAP) from the United Kingdom (UK) between 2010 and 2017 and the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) from the United States of America (USA) between 2010 and 2018. After exclusion criteria, there were 32 719 STEMI patients aged ≤50 from MINAP, and 238 952 patients' ≤50 from the NIS. We analysed temporal trends in demographics, management, and mortality. The proportion of females increased, 15.6% (2010-2012) to 17.6% (2016-2017) (UK) and 22.8% (2010-2012) to 23.1% (2016-2018) (USA). The proportion of white patients decreased, from 86.7% (2010) to 79.1% (2017) (UK) and 72.1% (2010) to 67.1% (2017) (USA). Invasive coronary angiography (ICA) rates increased in UK (2010-2012: 89.0%, 2016-2017: 94.3%), while decreased in USA (2010-2012: 88.9%, 2016-2018: 86.2% (USA). After adjusting for baseline characteristics and management strategies, there was no difference in all-cause mortality in the UK in 2016-2017 compared to 2010-2012 (OR:1.21, 95% CI:0.60-2.40), but there was a decrease in the USA in 2016-2018 compared to 2010-2012 (OR: 0.84, 95% CI: 0.79-0.90).

CONCLUSION

The demographics of young STEMI patients have temporally changed in the UK and USA, with increased proportions of females and ethnic minorities. There was a significant increase in the frequency of diabetes mellitus over the respective time periods in both countries.

Palliative Care Use in Patients With Acute Myocardial Infarction and Do-Not-Resuscitate Status From a Nationwide Inpatient Cohort

OBJECTIVE

To examine the predictors, treatments, and outcomes of the use of palliative care in patients hospitalized with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) who had a do-not-resuscitate (DNR) order.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Using the National (Nationwide) Inpatient Sampling database for 2015-2018, we examined the predictors, in-hospital procedures, and outcomes of palliative care recipients among patients with AMI who had a DNR order.

RESULTS

We identified 339,270 admissions with AMI that had a DNR order, including patients who received palliative care (n=113,215 [33.4%]). Compared with patients who did not receive palliative care, these patients were more frequently younger (median age, 81 vs 83 years; P<.001), were less likely to be female (50.9% [57,626 of 113,215] vs 54.7% [123,652 of 226,055]; P<.001), and were more likely to present with cardiac arrest (11.6% [13,133 of 113,215] vs 6.9% [15,598 of 226,055]; P<.001). Patients were more likely to receive palliative care at a large (odds ratio [OR], 1.47; 95% CI, 1.44 to 1.50) or teaching (OR, 2.10; 95% CI, 2.04 to 2.16) hospitals compared with small or rural ones. Patients receiving palliative care were less likely to be treated invasively, with reduced rates of invasive coronary angiography (OR, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.45 to 0.47) and percutaneous coronary intervention (OR, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.45 to 0.48), and were more likely to die in the hospital (52.4% [59,325 of 113,215] vs 22.9% [51,766 of 226,055]).

CONCLUSION

In patients who had a DNR status and were hospitalized and received a diagnosis of AMI, only one-third received palliative care.

Mortality in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction patients without standard modifiable risk factors: A race disaggregated analysis

Background

Individuals who present with STEMI without the standard cardiovascular risk factors (SMuRFs) of diabetes, hypercholesterolemia, hypertension, and smoking, coined SMuRF-less are not uncommon. Little is known about their outcomes as a cohort and how they differ by race.

Methods & Results

We identified 431,615 admissions with STEMI in the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) database 2015–2018, including patients with ≥ 1 SMuRF (n = 369,870) and those who were SMuRF-less (n = 234,745). SMuRF-less patients presented at a similar age (median age 63y vs 63y), were less likely to be female (33.6 % vs 34.6 %) and were almost twice as likely to present as a cardiac arrest (13.7 % vs 7.0 %), than those with ≥ 1 SMuRFs. SMuRF-less patients were less frequently in receipt of ICA (71.3 % vs 83.8 %) and PCI (58.0 % vs 72.2 %) compared to those with ≥ 1 SMuRF. Our race disaggregated analysis showed ethnic minority SMuRF-less patients were less likely than White patients to receive ICA and PCI, which was most apparent in Black patients with reduced odds of ICA (OR: 0.47, 95 % CI: 0.43–0.52) and PCI (OR: 0.46, 95 % CI: 0.52–0.50). Similarly, in ethnic minority subgroups within the SMuRF-less cohort, mortality and MACCE were significantly higher than in White patients. This was most profound in Black patients with in-hospital mortality (OR: 1.90, 95 % CI: 1.72–2.09) and MACCE (OR: 1.63, 95 % CI: 1.49–1.78) compared to White patients.

Conclusion

Ethnic Minority SMuRF-less patients were less likely than White SMuRF-less patients to receive ICA and PCI and had worse mortality outcomes.

Impact of QRS Duration on Non-ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction (from a National Registry)

QRS duration (QRSd) is ill-defined and under-researched as a prognosticator in patients with non-ST-segment myocardial infarction (NSTEMI). We analyzed 240,866 adult (≥18 years) hospitalizations with non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction using data from the United Kingdom Myocardial Infarction National Audit Project. Clinical characteristics and all-cause in-hospital mortality were analyzed according to QRSd, with 38,023 patients presenting with a QRSd >120 ms and 202,842 patients with a QRSd <120 ms. Patients with a QRSd >120 ms were more frequently older (median age of 79 years vs 71 years, p <0.001), and of white ethnicity (93% vs 91%, p <0.001). Patients with a QRSd <120 ms had higher frequency of use of aspirin (97% vs 95%, p <0.001), P2Y12 inhibitor (93% vs 89%, p <0.001), angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin receptor blocker (82% vs 81%, p <0.001) and β blockers (83% vs 78%, p <0.001). Invasive management strategies were more likely to be used in patients with QRSd <120 ms including invasive coronary angiography (72% vs 54%, p <0.001), percutaneous coronary intervention (46% vs 33%, p <0.001) and coronary artery bypass graft surgery (8% vs 6%, p <0.001). In a propensity score matching analysis, there were no differences between the 2 groups in the adjusted rates of in-hospital all-cause mortality (odds ratio 0.94, 95% confidence interval 0.86 to 1.01) or major adverse cardiac events (odds ratio 0.94, 95% confidence interval 0.85 to 1.02) during the index admission. In conclusion, prolonged QRSd >120 ms in the context of non-ST-segment myocardial infarction is not associated with worse in-hospital mortality or the outcomes of major adverse cardiac events.

Impact of the admitting ward on care quality and outcomes in non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: insights from a national registry

AIMS

Little is known about the association between the type of admission ward and quality of care and outcomes for non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI).

METHODS AND RESULTS

We analysed data from 337 155 NSTEMI admissions between 2010 and 2017 in the UK Myocardial Ischaemia National Audit Project (MINAP) database. The cohort was dichotomised according to receipt of care either on a medical (n = 142,876) or cardiac ward, inclusive of acute cardiac wards and cardiac care unit (n = 194,279) on admission to hospital. Patients admitted to a cardiac ward were younger (median age 70 y vs. 75 y, P < 0.001), and less likely to be female (33% vs. 40%, P < 0.001). Independent factors associated with admission to a cardiac ward included ischaemic ECG changes (OR: 1.20, 95% CI: 1.18-1.23) and prior percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) (OR: 1.19, 95% CI: 1.16-1.22). Patients admitted to a cardiac ward were more likely to receive optimal pharmacotherapy with statin (85% vs. 81%, P < 0.001) and dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) (91% vs. 88%, P < 0.001) on discharge, undergo invasive coronary angiography (78% vs. 59%, P < 0.001), and receive revascularisation in the form of PCI (52% vs. 36%, P < 0.001). Following multivariable logistic regression, the odds of inhospital all-cause mortality (OR: 0.75, 95% CI: 0.70-0.81) and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) (OR: 0.84, 95% CI: 0.78-0.91) were lower in patients admitted to a cardiac ward.

CONCLUSION

Patients with NSTEMI admitted to a cardiac ward on admission were more likely to receive guideline directed management and had better clinical outcomes.

Ethnic disparities in care and outcomes of non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: a nationwide cohort study

AIMS

Little is known about ethnic disparities in care and clinical outcomes of patients admitted with non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) in national cohorts from universal healthcare systems derived from Europe.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We identified 280 588 admissions with NSTEMI in the UK Myocardial Infarction National Audit Project (MINAP), 2010-2017, including White patients (n = 258 364) and Black, Asian, and Minority Ethnic (BAME) patients (n = 22 194). BAME patients were younger (66 years vs. 73 years, P < 0.001) and more frequently had hypertension (66% vs. 54%, P < 0.001), hypercholesterolaemia (49% vs. 34%, P < 0.001), and diabetes (48% vs. 24%, P < 0.001). BAME patients more frequently received invasive coronary angiography (80% vs. 68%, P < 0.001), percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) (52% vs. 43%, P < 0.001), and coronary artery bypass graft surgery (9% vs. 7%, P < 0.001). Following propensity score matching, BAME compared with White patients had similar in-hospital all-cause mortality [odds ratio (OR) 0.91, confidence interval (CI) 0.76-1.06; P = 0.23], major bleeding (OR 0.99, CI 0.75-1.25; P = 0.95), re-infarction (OR 1.15, CI 0.84-1.46; P = 0.34), and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) (OR 0.94, CI 0.80-1.07; P = 0.35).

CONCLUSION

BAME patients with NSTEMI had higher cardiometabolic risk profiles and were more likely to undergo invasive angiography and revascularization, with similar clinical outcomes as those of their White counterparts. Among the quality indicators assessed, there is no evidence of care disparities among BAME patients presenting with NSTEMI.

Association of admitting physician specialty and care quality and outcomes in non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI): insights from a national registry

AIM

Little is known about the association between admitting physician specialty and care quality and outcomes for non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI).

METHODS AND RESULTS

We identified 288 420 patients hospitalized with NSTEMI between 2010 and 2017 in the UK Myocardial Infarction National Audit Project database. The cohort was dichotomized according to care under a non-cardiologist (n = 146 722) and care under a cardiologist (n = 141 698) within the first 24 h of admission to hospital. Patients admitted under a cardiologist were significantly younger (70 vs. 75 years, P < 0.001), and less likely to be female (32% vs. 39%, P < 0.001). Independent factors associated with admission under a cardiologist included prior history of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) [odds ratio (OR) 1.04, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.01-1.07; P = 0.04], hypercholesterolaemia (OR 1.17, 95% CI 1.15-1.20; P < 0.001), hypertension (OR 1.03, 95% CI 1.01-1.04; P = 0.01), and admission to an interventional centre (OR 3.90, 95% CI 3.79-4.00; P < 0.001). Patients admitted under cardiology were more likely to receive optimal pharmacotherapy, undergo invasive coronary angiography (79% vs. 60%, P < 0.001), and receive revascularization in the form of PCI (52% vs. 36%, P < 0.001). Following propensity score matching, odds of in-hospital all-cause mortality (OR 0.81, 95% CI 0.79-0.85; P < 0.001), re-infarction (OR 0.78, 95% CI 0.66-0.91; P = 0.001), and major adverse cardiovascular events (OR 0.81, 95% CI 0.78-0.84; P < 0.001) were lower in patients admitted under a cardiologist.

CONCLUSION

Patients with NSTEMI admitted under a cardiologist within 24 h of hospital admission were more likely to receive guideline-directed management and had better clinical outcomes.

Emergency department cardiovascular disease encounters and associated mortality in patients with cancer: A study of 20.6 million records from the USA

BACKGROUND

there is limited data on Emergency department (ED) cardiovascular disease (CVD) presentations and outcomes amongst cancer patients.

OBJECTIVES

The present study aimed to describe the clinical characteristics, prevalence, and clinical outcomes of the most common cardiovascular ED admissions in patients with cancer.

METHODS

All ED encounters with a primary CVD diagnosis from the US Nationwide Emergency Department Sample between January 2016 to December 2018 were stratified by cancer type as well as metastatic status. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to determine the adjusted odds ratios of in-hospital mortality in different groups.

RESULTS

From a total of 20,737,247 ED encounters with a primary CVD diagnosis, cancer was present in 3.4%. In patients with cancer the most common CVDs were DVT/PE (20%), hypertensive heart or kidney disease (14.7%), and AF/flutter (11.2%). The distribution of CVDs varied by cancer type, with AF/flutter most common in patients with lung cancer, AMI most common in patients with prostate cancer, heart failure most common in those with haematological malignancies, and patients with colorectal cancer having the greatest frequency of DVT/PE. Cancer status was independently associated with significantly higher risk of mortality in almost all CVD categories, consistent across all the cancer types, amongst which lung cancer patients had the highest risk of mortality across all CVD categories, except intracranial haemorrhage and hypertensive crisis.

CONCLUSIONS

Cardiovascular presentations to the ED varied by cancer subtype. Across all cancer subtypes, patients presenting with cardiovascular presentations carried a significantly increased risk of mortality compared to patients with no cancer.

Racial Disparities in Management and Outcomes of Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest Complicating Myocardial Infarction: A National Study From England and Wales

BACKGROUND

Studies of racial disparities in care of patients admitted with an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) in the setting of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) have shown inconsistent results. Whether these differences in care exist in the universal healthcare system in United Kingdom is unknown.

METHODS

Patients admitted with a diagnosis of AMI and OHCA between 2010 and 2017 from the Myocardial Ischaemia National Audit Project (MINAP) were studied. All patients were stratified based on ethnicity into a Black, Asian, or minority ethnicity (BAME) group vs a White group. We used multivariable logistic regression models to evaluate the predictors of clinical outcomes and treatment strategy.

RESULTS

From 14,287 patients admitted with AMI complicated by OHCA, BAME patients constituted a minority of patients (1185 [8.3%]), compared with a White group (13,102 [91.7%]). BAME patients were younger (median age [interquartile range]) for BAME group, 58 [50-70] years; for White group, 65 [55-74] years). Cardiogenic shock (BAME group, 33%; White group, 20.7%; P < 0.001) and severe left ventricular impairment (BAME group, 21%; White group, 16.5%; P < 0.003) were more frequent among BAME patients. BAME patients were more likely to be seen by a cardiologist (BAME group, 95.9%; White group, 92.5%; P < 0.001) and were more likely to receive coronary angiography than the White group (odds ratio [OR] 1.5, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.2-1.88). The BAME group had significantly higher in-hospital mortality (OR 1.26, 95% CI 1.04-1.52) and re-infarction (OR 1.52, 95% CI 1.06-2.18) than the White group.

CONCLUSIONS

BAME patients were more likely to be seen by a cardiologist and receive coronary angiography than White patients. Despite this difference, the in-hospital mortality of BAME patients, particularly in the Asian population, was significantly higher.

Addressing disparities of care in non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction patients without standard modifiable risk factors: insights from a nationwide cohort study

AIMS

The importance of standard modifiable cardiovascular risk factors (SMuRFs) in preventing non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) is established. However, NSTEMI may present in the absence of SMuRFs, and little is known about their outcomes.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We analysed 176 083 adult (≥18 years) hospitalizations with NSTEMI using data from the United Kingdom (UK) Myocardial Infarction National Audit Project (MINAP). Clinical characteristics and all-cause in-hospital mortality were analysed according to SMuRF status, with 135 223 patients presenting with at least one of diabetes, hypertension, hypercholesterolaemia, or current smoking status and 40 860 patients without any SMuRFs. Those with a history of coronary artery disease were excluded. Patients without SMuRFs were more frequently older (median age 72 year vs. 71 years, P < 0.001), male (62% vs. 61%, P < 0.001), and Caucasian (95% vs. 92%, P < 0.001). Those without SMuRFs less frequently received statins (71% vs. 81%, P < 0.001), had their left ventricular (LV) function recorded (62% vs. 65%, P < 0.001) or for those with moderate or severe LV systolic dysfunction were prescribed angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin receptor blockers (80% vs. 85%, P < 0.001). Following propensity score matching the odds of all-cause mortality [odds ratio (OR): 0.85, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.77-0.93], cardiac mortality (OR: 0.85, 95% CI: 0.76-0.94), and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) (OR: 0.85, 95% CI: 0.77-0.93) were lower in patients without SMuRFs.

CONCLUSION

More than one in five patients presenting with NSTEMI had no SMuRFs, who were less frequently received guideline-recommended management and had lower in-hospital (all-cause and cardiac) mortality and MACE than patients with SMuRFs.

Predictors, Treatments, and Outcomes of Do-Not-Resuscitate Status in Acute Myocardial Infarction Patients (from a Nationwide Inpatient Cohort Study)

Little is known about how frequently do-not-resuscitate (DNR) orders are placed in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI), the types of patients in which they are placed, treatment strategies or clinical outcomes of such patients. Using the United States (US) National Inpatient Sample (NIS) database from 2015 to 2018, we identified 2,767,549 admissions that were admitted to US hospitals and during the hospitalization received a principle diagnosis of AMI, of which 339,270 (12.3%) patients had a DNR order (instigated both preadmission and during in-hospital stay). Patients with a DNR status were older (median age 83 vs 65, p < 0.001), more likely to be female (53.4% vs 39.3%, p < 0.001) and White (81.0% vs 73.3%, p < 0.001). Predictors of DNR status included comorbidities such as heart failure (OR: 1.47, 95% CI: 1.45 to 1.48), dementia (OR: 2.53, 95% CI: 2.50 to 2.55), and cancer. Patients with a DNR order were less likely to undergo invasive management or be discharged home (13.5% vs 52.8%), with only 1/3 receiving palliative consultation. In hospital mortality (32.7% vs 4.6%, p < 0.001) and MACCE (37.1% vs 8.8%, p < 0.001) were higher in the DNR group. Factors independently associated with in-hospital mortality among patients with a DNR order included a STEMI presentation (OR: 2.90, 95% CI: 2.84 to 2.96) and being of Black (OR: 1.29, 95% CI: 1.26 to 1.33), Hispanic (OR: 1.36, 95% CI: 1.32 to 1.41) or Asian/Pacific Islander (OR: 1.56, 95% CI:1.49-race. In conclusion, AMI patients with a DNR status were older, multimorbid, less likely to receive invasive management, with only one third of patients with DNR status referred for palliative care.

Clinical Characteristics and Predictors of Mortality in Patients with COVID-19 Infection Outside Intensive Care

BACKGROUND/INTRODUCTION

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has affected all aspects of inpatient hospital medicine with patients admitted from level 1 (general medical wards) to level 3 (intensive care). Often, there are subtle physiological differences in these cohorts of patients. In particular, in intensive care, patients tend to be younger and have increased disease severity. Data, to date, has combined outcomes from medical and intensive care cohorts, or looked exclusively at intensive care. We looked solely at the level 1 (medical) cohort to identify their clinical characteristics and predictors of outcome.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This was a retrospective study of adult patients admitted to a central London teaching hospital with a diagnosis of COVID-19 from 23rd March to 7th April 2020 identified from the hospital electronic database. Any patients who required level 2 or 3 care were excluded.

RESULTS

A total of 229 patients were included for analysis. Increased age and frailty scores were associated with increased 30-day mortality. Reduced renal function and elevated troponin blood levels are also associated with poor outcome. Baseline observations showed that increased oxygen requirement was predictive for mortality. A trend of increased mortality with lower diastolic blood pressure was noted. Lymphopenia was not shown to be related to mortality.

CONCLUSION

Urea and creatinine are the best predictors of mortality in the level 1 cohort. Unlike previous intensive care data, lymphopenia is not predictive of mortality. We suggest that these factors be considered when prognosticating and for resource allocation for the treatment and escalation of care for patients with COVID-19 infection.