CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

急性冠脉综合征

Abstract

Recommended Article

Changes in One-Year Mortality in Elderly Patients Admitted with Acute Myocardial Infarction in Relation with Early Management New technologies for intensive prevention programs after myocardial infarction: rationale and design of the NET-IPP trial Short Duration of DAPT Versus De-Escalation After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for Acute Coronary Syndromes Sex-Specific Thresholds of High-Sensitivity Troponin in Patients With Suspected Acute Coronary Syndrome Association of Parenteral Anticoagulation Therapy With Outcomes in Chinese Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for Non-ST-Segment Elevation Acute Coronary Syndrome Heart rate, pulse pressure and mortality in patients with myocardial infarction complicated by heart failure Randomized trial of complete versus lesion-only revascularization in patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention for STEMI and multivessel disease: the CvLPRIT trial Cardiovascular Mortality After Type 1 and Type 2 Myocardial Infarction in Young Adults

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.