CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

Acute Coronary Syndrom

Abstract

Recommended Article

Fractional flow reserve vs. angiography in guiding management to optimize outcomes in non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: the British Heart Foundation FAMOUS-NSTEMI randomized trial New technologies for intensive prevention programs after myocardial infarction: rationale and design of the NET-IPP trial Mild Hypothermia in Cardiogenic Shock Complicating Myocardial Infarction - The Randomized SHOCK-COOL Trial The prognostic role of mid-range ejection fraction in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction Invasive Management of Acute Myocardial Infarction Complicated by Cardiogenic Shock: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association Improved outcomes in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction during the last 20 years are related to implementation of evidence-based treatments: experiences from the SWEDEHEART registry 1995-2014 Epinephrine Versus Norepinephrine for Cardiogenic Shock After Acute Myocardial Infarction Letter by Jiang et al Regarding Article, “Direct Comparison of Cardiac Myosin-Binding Protein C With Cardiac Troponins for the Early Diagnosis of Acute 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.