Terrence Donnelly Heart Centre, Division of Cardiology, St Michael's Hospital, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Can J Cardiol. 2012 Jan-Feb;28(1):40-7. doi: 10.1016/j.cjca.2011.09.011. Epub 2011 Nov 29.
We examine the clinical characteristics and outcomes of ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients receiving various reperfusion therapies in 2 contemporary Canadian registries.
Of 4045 STEMI patients, 2024 received reperfusion therapy and had complete data on invasive management. They were stratified by reperfusion strategy used: primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) (n = 716); fibrinolysis with rescue PCI (n = 177); fibrinolysis with urgent/elective PCI (n = 210); and fibrinolysis without PCI (n = 921). Data were collected on clinical and laboratory findings, and outcomes.
Compared with fibrinolytic-treated patients, patients treated with primary PCI were younger and had higher Killip class, had longer time to delivery of reperfusion therapy, and utilized more antiplatelet therapy but less heparin, β-blockers and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors. In-hospital death occurred in 2.7% of patients treated with primary PCI, 1.7% fibrinolysis-rescue PCI, 1.0% fibrinolysis-urgent/elective PCI, and 4.8% fibrinolysis-alone (P = 0.009); the rates of death/reinfarction were 3.9%, 4.0%, 4.3%, and 7.1% (P = 0.032), respectively. The rate of shock was highest in the primary PCI group. Rates of heart failure or major bleeding were similar in the 4 groups. In multivariable analysis, no PCI during hospitalization was associated with death and reinfarction (adjusted odds ratio = 1.66; 95% confidence interval, 1.03-2.70; P = 0.04).
Clinical features, time to reperfusion, and medication utilization differed with respect to the reperfusion strategy. While low rates of re-infarction/death were observed, these complications occurred more frequently in those who did not undergo PCI during index hospitalization.
我们在 2 个当代加拿大注册研究中检查了接受不同再灌注治疗的 ST 段抬高型心肌梗死(STEMI)患者的临床特征和结局。
在 4045 例 STEMI 患者中,2024 例接受了再灌注治疗,并且具有完整的侵入性管理数据。根据使用的再灌注策略对他们进行分层:直接经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)(n = 716);溶栓加补救 PCI(n = 177);溶栓加紧急/选择性 PCI(n = 210);以及溶栓不加 PCI(n = 921)。收集了临床和实验室检查结果以及结局的数据。
与溶栓治疗的患者相比,接受直接 PCI 治疗的患者年龄较小,Killip 分级较高,接受再灌注治疗的时间较长,并且使用了更多的抗血小板治疗,但肝素、β受体阻滞剂和血管紧张素转换酶抑制剂的使用较少。直接 PCI 治疗组住院期间死亡 2.7%,溶栓加补救 PCI 治疗组 1.7%,溶栓加紧急/选择性 PCI 治疗组 1.0%,溶栓不加 PCI 治疗组 4.8%(P = 0.009);死亡/再梗死的发生率分别为 3.9%、4.0%、4.3%和 7.1%(P = 0.032)。直接 PCI 组休克发生率最高。4 组心力衰竭或大出血发生率相似。多变量分析显示,住院期间未行 PCI 与死亡和再梗死相关(调整后的优势比=1.66;95%置信区间,1.03-2.70;P = 0.04)。
再灌注策略不同,临床特征、再灌注时间和药物使用也不同。尽管观察到再梗死/死亡的低发生率,但这些并发症在指数住院期间未行 PCI 的患者中更频繁发生。