Cardiology Department, The Prince Charles Hospital, Brisbane, QLD, Australia; School of Clinical Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.
Cardiology Department, The Prince Charles Hospital, Brisbane, QLD, Australia; QIMR Berghofer Medical Research Institute, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.
Indian Heart J. 2024 Jul-Aug;76(4):254-259. doi: 10.1016/j.ihj.2024.08.001. Epub 2024 Aug 22.
The incidence of STEMI and subsequent mortality has been reported to be higher in Indian populations compared to developed countries. However, there is limited data directly comparing contemporary primary percutaneous coronary intervention (pPCI) treatment strategies and clinical outcomes for STEMI patients between developed and developing countries.
We compared population demographics, procedural characteristics, times to reperfusion and mortality in STEMI patients treated with pPCI between two tertiary referral centers in India and Australia respectively over a 3-year period (1st Jan 2017-31st Dec 2019).
A total of 1293 STEMI presentations (896 Indian vs 397 Australian) were included. On average, Indian patients had lower median BMI than Australian patients (BMI 25.4 vs 27.8; p < 0.001), were significantly younger (mean age 56.0 vs 63.2 years; p < 0.001), more likely male (84 % vs 80 %; p = 0.046) and diabetic (48 % vs 18 %); p < 0.001). Radial access (50 % vs 88 %; p < 0.001) and TIMI III flow post PCI was also significantly lower (85 % vs 96 %; p < 0.001) with median door-to-balloon time significantly shorter in the Indian cohort (20mins vs 43mins; p < 0.001); however, median symptom to balloon time was significantly longer (245mins vs 160mins; p < 0.001). No significant differences in 30-day mortality (4.0 % vs 2.8 % Australian; p = 0.209) or 1-year mortality (6.5 % vs 4.3 %; p = 0.120) were observed.
Significant differences in demographics and presentation characteristics exist between Indian and Australian STEMI patients treated with pPCI. Indian patients had significantly longer pre-hospital delays and lower achievement of TIMI III flow post PCI, yet shorter in-hospital time to treatment.
与发达国家相比,印度人群的 STEMI 发病率和随后的死亡率更高。然而,关于发展中国家和发达国家之间直接比较 STEMI 患者的当代经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(pPCI)治疗策略和临床结局的数据有限。
我们比较了印度和澳大利亚的两个三级转诊中心在 3 年期间(2017 年 1 月 1 日至 2019 年 12 月 31 日)接受 pPCI 治疗的 STEMI 患者的人口统计学特征、程序特征、再灌注时间和死亡率。
共纳入 1293 例 STEMI 发作(896 例印度 vs 397 例澳大利亚)。平均而言,印度患者的 BMI 中位数低于澳大利亚患者(BMI 25.4 对 27.8;p<0.001),年龄明显较小(平均年龄 56.0 对 63.2 岁;p<0.001),更可能为男性(84%对 80%;p=0.046)和糖尿病患者(48%对 18%;p<0.001)。桡动脉入路(50%对 88%;p<0.001)和 PCI 后 TIMI III 级血流也明显较低(85%对 96%;p<0.001),印度队列的门球时间中位数明显较短(20 分钟对 43 分钟;p<0.001);然而,中位症状至球囊时间明显较长(245 分钟对 160 分钟;p<0.001)。30 天死亡率(4.0%对澳大利亚 2.8%;p=0.209)或 1 年死亡率(6.5%对 4.3%;p=0.120)无显著差异。
接受 pPCI 治疗的印度和澳大利亚 STEMI 患者在人口统计学和临床表现特征方面存在显著差异。印度患者的院前延迟时间明显更长,PCI 后 TIMI III 级血流的获得率更低,但院内治疗时间更短。