Short- and long-term mortality in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction treated with different therapeutic strategies. Results from WIelkopolska REgional 2002 Registry (WIRE Registry)
1st Department of Cardiology, Pozan University of Medical Science, Poznan, Poland. Kardiologia polska
(Impact Factor: 0.54).
02/2008; 66(2):154-63; discussion 164-5.
Although primary coronary angioplasty seems to be the best treatment in acute myocardial infarction (MI), thrombolytic therapy still remains the most common reperfusion strategy particularly in smaller centers. Nowadays, different regional networks are developed to improve the treatment of patients with MI.
To analyse the effects of different therapeutic strategies on 30-day and long-term mortality (median time 18.3 months) after ST-elevation MI (STEMI) in a population of 3 350 000 people from the Wielkopolska Region.
In 2002, 3780 patients with STEMI entered the registry. Complete data were available for 3564 (94.3%) patients. Depending on therapeutic strategies, patients were divided into five groups: the PCI group--direct percutaneous coronary angioplasty (PCI) in small cathlab, 'selected patients', n=381 (10.7%); the PA group--aged <70, treated with tissue plasminogen activator (rt-PA) up to 4 hours from the onset of chest pain, n=479 (13.4%); the IS group - invasive strategy in every patient, 24-hour duty, setting of unselected patients with STEMI, n=989 (27.7%); the SK group--patients receiving standard streptokinase treatment up to 12 hours from the onset of chest pain, n=584 (16.4%); the NR group--no reperfusion therapy, n=1131 (31.7%).
The 30-day mortality rate in the groups above was: 3.15, 4.38, 4.54, 9.25, and 12.5% respectively (p <0.001). Long-term mortality rate was: 4.2, 9.4, 9.4, 14.4, and 18.50% respectively (p <0.001). The rate of urgent PCI in the PA group was 25% and in the SK group--11% (p <0.001).
Treatment with rt-PA in patients under 70 years of age and up to 4 hours from pain onset may be an alternative to an invasive strategy. However, a quarter of those patients require urgent PCI. In long-term observation the mortality benefit can be clearly seen only in patients with early PCI.
Available from: Piotr Jankowski
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Both in the European and Polish guidelines the highest priority for preventive cardiology was given to patients with established cardiovascular disease. The Cracovian Program for Secondary Prevention of Ischaemic Heart Disease was initiated in 1996. The main goal of the program was to assess and improve the quality of clinical care in the secondary prevention of ischaemic heart disease. Later, the same centres joined the EUROASPIRE (European Action on Secondary and Primary Prevention Intervention to Reduce Events) II and III surveys.
To compare the quality of secondary prevention in Krakow cardiac departments in 1996/1997, 1998/1999 and 2005/2006.
Five hospitals serving the area of the city of Krakow and surrounding districts (former Krakow Voivodship), inhabited by 1,200,000 persons, took part in the surveys. Consecutive patients hospitalised from July 1, 1996 to September 31, 1997 (first survey), from March 1, 1998 to March 30, 1999 (second survey), and from April 1, 2005 to July 31, 2006 (third survey) due to acute myocardial infarction, unstable angina or for myocardial revascularisation procedures, below the age of <71 years were recruited and included to the present analysis. All medical records were reviewed by trained reviewers using standardised data collection forms.
Medical records of 536 patients treated in 1996/1997, 515 treated 1998/1999, and 540 treated in 2005/2006 were reviewed and analysed. Proportions of medical records with available information on risk factors prior to hospitalisation as well as proportions of medical records with available information on blood pressure (by 10%, p < 0.05) and lipids (by over 30%, p < 0.05) measurements during the first 24 h of hospitalisation as well as on weight and height measurements (by 16%, p < 0.05) increased significantly from 1996/1997 to 2005/2006. Antiplatelets prescription rate at discharge increased from 87% to 97% (p < 0.05), prescription rate for beta-blockers increased from 66% to 91% (p < 0.05), ACE inhibitors/sartans from 50% to 89% (p < 0.05), and lipid lowering drugs from 27% to 96% (p < 0.05) between 1996/1997 and 2005/2006, respectively.
The implementation of secondary prevention guidelines into clinical practice in the Krakow cardiac departments improved in 2005/2006 as compared to 1996/1997 and 1998/1999. Our results suggest that recent decade brought significant improvement in the approach to secondary prevention of ischaemic heart disease in hospital practice.
Kardiologia polska 08/2009; 67(8A):970-7. · 0.54 Impact Factor
Available from: sciencedirect.com
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) is one of the greatest medical emergencies, for which organization of care has a determinant impact on patient outcomes. The purpose of this paper is to review systems of care for STEMI patients. Although primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is the preferred option for patients with STEMI, offering easy and emergent access to this procedure often remains difficult because of geographic and diverse structural difficulties. intravenous fibrinolysis, especially when administered early after symptom onset and as part of a pharmacoinvasive strategy (i.e., followed by rapid coronary angiography with PCI when necessary), offers a reasonable therapeutic option in selected cases and has yielded satisfactory clinical results. Network organization is central for optimizing patient care at the acute stage of myocardial infarction. This review describes different clinical experiences with network implementation both in Europe and in North America. In all instances, early recognition of STEMI and, particularly in the pre-hospital setting, shortening time delays is central for the achievement of optimal clinical results. Overall, the encouraging results described in the models presented here, as diverse as they might be, should be an encouragement to promote and implement regional protocols according to the specific local constraints and to monitor their effectiveness by recording simple quality indicators in ongoing registries.
JACC. Cardiovascular Interventions 10/2009; 2(10):901-8. DOI:10.1016/j.jcin.2009.05.025 · 7.35 Impact Factor
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Although primary coronary intervention (PCI) is currently regarded as the preferred reperfusion strategy in ST- -elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), its superiority over thrombolysis has been documented mainly in high-risk patients. In low-risk patients, the difference seems to be not so significant.
To evaluate the early and late mortality in low-risk STEMI patients treated with thrombolysis, PCI, or conservatively.
From a total of 3,780 consecutive STEMI patients presenting within 24 h from symptom onset, 990 low-risk patients (age < 70 years old, Killip-Kimball class 1 at admission, non-anterior STEMI) were selected. The median follow-up duration was 18.3 (14.2-25.0) months. The patients were subdivided into three groups: group A (n = 465) - treated with PCI; group B (n = 289) - treated with thrombolysis; and group C (n = 236) - treated conservatively.
In the whole study group 12 (1.21%) patients died; 30-day mortality in group A was 0.65%. In group B five out of 289 (1.73%) patients died, and in group C four out of 236 (1.69%) patients died. No significant differences in 30-day mortality between these three groups were found (p = 0.3). During the long-term follow-up, 37 (3.7%) of 990 patients died. In group A 18 (3.9%) patients died, in group B ten (3.4%) patients died, and in group C nine (3.8%) patients died (p = 0.96).
No significant differences in 30-day or long-term mortality rates between conservative therapy, PCI or thrombolysis groups in low-risk STEMI patients were observed.
Kardiologia polska 01/2012; 70(1):1-5. · 0.54 Impact Factor
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.