CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

急性冠脉综合征

科研文章

荐读文献

Triage Considerations for Patients Referred for Structural Heart Disease Intervention During the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Pandemic: An ACC /SCAI Consensus Statement Early versus delayed invasive intervention in acute coronary syndromes Evaluation and Management of Nonculprit Lesions in STEMI Effect of Smoking on Outcomes of Primary PCI in Patients With STEMI Post-Discharge Bleeding and Mortality Following Acute Coronary Syndromes With or Without PCI New technologies for intensive prevention programs after myocardial infarction: rationale and design of the NET-IPP trial Heart Regeneration by Endogenous Stem Cells and Cardiomyocyte Proliferation: Controversy, Fallacy, and Progress Effect of Pre-Hospital Crushed Prasugrel Tablets in Patients with STEMI Planned for Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: The Randomized COMPARE CRUSH Trial Comparison in prevalence, predictors, and clinical outcome of VSR versus FWR after acute myocardial infarction: The prospective, multicenter registry MOODY trial-heart rupture analysis Imaging Coronary Anatomy and Reducing Myocardial Infarction

Original Research2020 Jul 15;S0167-5273(20)33449-5.

JOURNAL:Int J Cardiol. Article Link

The prognostic role of mid-range ejection fraction in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction

M Alkhalil, A Kearney, D MacElhatton et al. Keywords: mid-range ejection fraction; STEMI; suboptimal medical therapy; renal dysfunction

ABSTRACT

OBJECIVE - There is a paucity of studies investigating the impact of mid-range ejection fraction (mrEF) on clinical outcomes, including ventricular arrhythmias, in ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). We sought to investigate the prognostic role of mrEF post STEMI and whether recommended medical therapy may modify future risk.


METHODS - 533 consecutive patients from a single large-volume centre who underwent primary percutaneous coronary intervention were included. Reduced EF (<40%), mrEF (40-49%) and preserved EF (≥50%) were defined according to the European Society of Cardiology guidelines. Clinical outcomes were prospectively collected, and the primary endpoint was defined as the composite of death, re-admission with heart failure, sustained ventricular arrhythmia requiring hospitalisation or implantable cardioverter defibrillator over three years follow-up.


RESULTS - There was a stepwise increase in the primary endpoint according to EF group (8%, 17%, 30%, P < .001), which was derived from each individual component. Compared to preserved EF, patients with mrEF had significantly higher risk [HR 4.08 (95%CI 2.38 to 6.99), P < .001]. The use of suboptimal medical therapy was associated with increased future risk, particularly in mrEF [HR 2.62, (95%CI 1.18 to 5.83), P = .018]. The proportion of mrEF patients who experience the primary endpoint was significantly different according the status of kidney function and recommended medical therapy (8%, 20%, 33%, 50%, P < .001).


CONCLUSIONS - Patients presenting with mrEF following STEMI had increased risk of death, heart failure hospitalisation and ventricular arrhythmias compared to preserved EF. Suboptimal medical therapy in mrEF was associated with increased adverse events, particularly in patients with renal dysfunction.


Copyright © 2020. Published by Elsevier B.V.