2012
Comparison of outcomes in ST-segment depression and ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction patients treated with emergency PCI: Data from a multicentre registry
KNOT, J.; Petr KALA; Richard ROKYTA; J. STASEK; B. KUZMANOV et al.Základní údaje
Originální název
Comparison of outcomes in ST-segment depression and ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction patients treated with emergency PCI: Data from a multicentre registry
Autoři
KNOT, J.; Petr KALA; Richard ROKYTA; J. STASEK; B. KUZMANOV; Ota HLINOMAZ; J. BĔLOHLAVEK; F. ROHAC; R. PETR; D. BILKOVA; S. DJAMBAZOV; M. GRIGOROV a P. WIDIMSKY
Vydání
Cardiovascular Journal of Africa, 2012, 1995-1892
Další údaje
Jazyk
angličtina
Typ výsledku
Článek v odborném periodiku
Obor
30201 Cardiac and Cardiovascular systems
Stát vydavatele
Jižní Afrika
Utajení
není předmětem státního či obchodního tajemství
Impakt faktor
Impact factor: 0.848
Označené pro přenos do RIV
Ano
Kód RIV
RIV/00216224:14110/12:00062228
Organizační jednotka
Lékařská fakulta
UT WoS
Klíčová slova anglicky
Acute myocardial infarction; Coronary artery disease; Primary PCI
Příznaky
Mezinárodní význam
Změněno: 8. 12. 2012 22:37, Mgr. Michal Petr
Anotace
V originále
Traditionally, acute myocardial infarction (AMI) has been described as either STEMI (ST-elevation myocardial infarction) or non-STEMI myocardial infarction. This classification is historically related to the use of thrombolytic therapy, which is effective in STEMI. The current era of widespread use of coronary angiography (CAG), usually followed by primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) puts this classification system into question. Objectives: To compare the outcomes of patients with STEMI and ST-depression myocardial infarction (STDMI) who were treated with emergency PCI. Methods: This multicentre registry enrolled a total of 6 602 consecutive patients with AMI. Patients were divided into the following subgroups: STEMI (n = 3446), STDMI (n = 907), left bundle branch block (LBBB) AMI (n = 241), right bundle branch block (RBBB) AMI (n = 338) and other electrocardiographic (ECG) AMI (n = 1670). Baseline and angiographic characteristics were studied, and revascularisation therapies and in-hospital mortality were analysed. Results: Acute heart failure was present in 29.5% of the STDMI vs 27.4% of the STEMI patients (p < 0.001). STDMI patients had more extensive coronary atherosclerosis than patients with STEMI (three-vessel disease: 53.1 vs 30%). The left main coronary artery was an infract-related artery (IRA) in 6.0% of STDMI vs 1.1% of STEMI patients. TIMI flow 0-1 was found in 35.0% of STDMI vs 66.0% of STEMI patients. Primary PCI was performed in 88.1% of STEMI (with a success rate of 90.8%) vs 61.8% of STDMI patients (with a success rate of 94.5%) (p = 0.012 for PCI success rates). In-hospital mortality was not significantly different (STDMI 6.3 vs STEMI 5.4%, p = 0.330). Conclusion: These data suggest that similar strategies (emergency CAG with PCI whenever feasible) should be applied to both these types of AMI.