Suppr超能文献

急性心肌梗死患者的左束支传导阻滞:1997年至2016年常规临床实践中的表现、治疗及转归趋势

Left bundle-branch block in patients with acute myocardial infarction: Presentation, treatment, and trends in outcome from 1997 to 2016 in routine clinical practice.

作者信息

Erne Paul, Iglesias Juan F, Urban Philip, Eberli Franz R, Rickli Hans, Simon René, Fischer Thomas A, Radovanovic Dragana

机构信息

AMIS Plus Switzerland, Department of Biomedicine, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland.

Cardiology Department, University Hospital, Lausanne, Switzerland.

出版信息

Am Heart J. 2017 Feb;184:106-113. doi: 10.1016/j.ahj.2016.11.003. Epub 2016 Nov 10.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Whether patients with acute myocardial infarction presenting with new or presumed new left bundle-branch block (LBBB) should be treated in the same way as those presenting with ST-elevation (STE) is still a matter of debate.

METHODS

Data from 28,358 patients enrolled in AMIS Plus from 1997 to 2016 were analyzed to evaluate differences in treatment and outcome of patients presenting with LBBB (n=2295) or STE (n=26,090) on their initial electrocardiogram using descriptive statistics and multivariate logistic regression.

RESULTS

LBBB patients were older (75.0 vs 64.3 years, P<.001) with a greater burden of risk factors and comorbidities. They were admitted 80 minutes later and more frequently in Killip III/IV (20% vs 7%, P<.001). Even after adjustment for age and gender, LBBB patients were less likely to receive aspirin (odds ratio [OR] 0.40, 95% CI 0.34-0.47), P2Y12 inhibitors (OR 0.50, 95% CI 0.45-0.54), β-blockers (OR 0.81, 95% CI 0.76-0.89), and statins (OR 0.70, 95% CI 0.63-0.76) or undergo percutaneous coronary interventions (OR 0.38, 95% CI 0.35-0.42). Crude in-hospital mortality of patients with LBBB was 16.2% versus 6.5% for patients with STE, but adjusted OR was 1.07 (95% CI 0.93-1.24). Mortality of LBBB patients decreased from 22.6% in 1997-2001 to 11.9% in 2012-2016.

CONCLUSIONS

Acute myocardial infarction patients with new or presumed new LBBB presence are at high risk of morbidity and mortality. They were treated less aggressively, and although mortality has halved during the last 20 years, there may be room for further improvement. Additional studies are needed to better identify those patients with LBBB who may maximally benefit from an early invasive treatment strategy.

摘要

背景

急性心肌梗死伴新发或疑似新发左束支传导阻滞(LBBB)的患者是否应与ST段抬高(STE)患者接受相同的治疗仍存在争议。

方法

分析1997年至2016年纳入AMIS Plus研究的28358例患者的数据,采用描述性统计和多因素logistic回归分析,评估初始心电图表现为LBBB(n = 2295)或STE(n = 26090)的患者在治疗和预后方面的差异。

结果

LBBB患者年龄更大(75.0岁对64.3岁,P <.001),危险因素和合并症负担更重。他们入院时间晚80分钟,且更频繁地处于Killip III/IV级(20%对7%,P <.001)。即使在调整年龄和性别后,LBBB患者接受阿司匹林治疗的可能性较小(比值比[OR] 0.40,95%置信区间0.34 - 0.47),接受P2Y12抑制剂治疗的可能性较小(OR 0.50,95%置信区间0.45 - 0.54),接受β受体阻滞剂治疗的可能性较小(OR 0.81,95%置信区间0.76 - 0.89),接受他汀类药物治疗的可能性较小(OR 0.70,95%置信区间0.63 - 0.76),或接受经皮冠状动脉介入治疗的可能性较小(OR 0.38,95%置信区间0.35 - 0.42)。LBBB患者的院内粗死亡率为16.2%,而STE患者为6.5%,但调整后的OR为1.07(95%置信区间0.93 - 1.24)。LBBB患者的死亡率从1997 - 2001年的22.6%降至2012 - 2016年的11.9%。

结论

新发或疑似新发LBBB的急性心肌梗死患者有较高的发病和死亡风险。他们接受的治疗不够积极,尽管在过去20年中死亡率已减半,但仍可能有进一步改善的空间。需要进一步研究以更好地识别那些可能从早期侵入性治疗策略中最大程度获益的LBBB患者。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验