Suppr超能文献

纤溶疗法与直接经皮冠状动脉介入治疗 ST 段抬高型心肌梗死合并心原性休克。

Fibrinolysis vs. primary percutaneous coronary intervention for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction cardiogenic shock.

机构信息

Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.

Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.

出版信息

ESC Heart Fail. 2021 Jun;8(3):2025-2035. doi: 10.1002/ehf2.13281. Epub 2021 Mar 11.

Abstract

AIMS

There are limited contemporary data on the use of initial fibrinolysis in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction cardiogenic shock (STEMI-CS). This study sought to compare the outcomes of STEMI-CS receiving initial fibrinolysis vs. primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI).

METHODS

Using the National (Nationwide) Inpatient Sample from 2009 to 2017, a comparative effectiveness study of adult (>18 years) STEMI-CS admissions receiving pre-hospital/in-hospital fibrinolysis were compared with those receiving PPCI. Admissions with alternate indications for fibrinolysis and STEMI-CS managed medically or with surgical revascularization (without fibrinolysis) were excluded. Outcomes of interest included in-hospital mortality, development of non-cardiac organ failure, complications, hospital length of stay, hospitalization costs, use of palliative care, and do-not-resuscitate status.

RESULTS

During 2009-2017, 5297 and 110 452 admissions received initial fibrinolysis and PPCI, respectively. Compared with those receiving PPCI, the fibrinolysis group was more often non-White, with lower co-morbidity, and admitted on weekends and to small rural hospitals (all P < 0.001). In the fibrinolysis group, 95.3%, 77.4%, and 15.7% received angiography, PCI, and coronary artery bypass grafting, respectively. The fibrinolysis group had higher rates of haemorrhagic complications (13.5% vs. 9.9%; P < 0.001). The fibrinolysis group had comparable all-cause in-hospital mortality [logistic regression analysis: 28.8% vs. 28.5%; propensity-matched analysis: 30.8% vs. 30.3%; adjusted odds ratio 0.97 (95% confidence interval 0.90-1.05); P = 0.50]. The fibrinolysis group had comparable rates of acute organ failure, hospital length of stay, rates of palliative care referrals, do-not-resuscitate status use, and lesser hospitalization costs.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of initial fibrinolysis had comparable in-hospital mortality than those receiving PPCI in STEMI-CS in the contemporary era in this large national observational study.

摘要

目的

目前关于 ST 段抬高型心肌梗死合并心原性休克(STEMI-CS)患者初始溶栓治疗的应用数据较为有限。本研究旨在比较 STEMI-CS 患者接受初始溶栓治疗与直接经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PPCI)的结局。

方法

利用 2009 年至 2017 年全国住院患者样本,对接受院前/院内溶栓治疗的成人(>18 岁)STEMI-CS 入院患者进行了一项比较效果的研究,并与接受 PPCI 的患者进行了比较。排除因其他适应证接受溶栓治疗且 STEMI-CS 接受药物治疗或手术血运重建(未接受溶栓治疗)的患者。主要观察终点包括院内死亡率、非心源性器官衰竭的发生、并发症、住院时间、住院费用、姑息治疗的使用和不复苏状态。

结果

2009 年至 2017 年期间,分别有 5297 例和 110452 例患者接受初始溶栓治疗和 PPCI。与接受 PPCI 的患者相比,溶栓组患者更常见于非白人、合并症更少,且就诊于周末和小的农村医院(均 P<0.001)。在溶栓组中,95.3%、77.4%和 15.7%的患者分别接受了血管造影、经皮冠状动脉介入治疗和冠状动脉旁路移植术。溶栓组的出血性并发症发生率较高(13.5%比 9.9%;P<0.001)。溶栓组的全因院内死亡率相当[logistic 回归分析:28.8%比 28.5%;倾向评分匹配分析:30.8%比 30.3%;调整后的比值比 0.97(95%置信区间 0.90-1.05);P=0.50]。溶栓组的急性器官衰竭发生率、住院时间、姑息治疗转介率、不复苏状态使用率和住院费用均相当。

结论

在这项大型全国性观察性研究中,与直接 PPCI 相比,在当代,STEMI-CS 患者接受初始溶栓治疗的院内死亡率相当。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/32e8/8120407/ea6045c2119a/EHF2-8-2025-g002.jpg

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