Becker R C, Burns M, Gore J M, Spencer F A, Ball S P, French W, Lambrew C, Bowlby L, Hilbe J, Rogers W J
Cardiovascular Thrombosis Research Center, Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester 01655, USA.
Am Heart J. 1998 May;135(5 Pt 1):786-96. doi: 10.1016/s0002-8703(98)70036-5.
Therapeutic decision making in critically ill patients requires both prompt and comprehensive analysis of available information. Data derived from randomized clinical trials provide a powerful tool for risk assessment in the setting of acute myocardial infarction (MI); however, timely and appropriate use of existing therapies and resources are the key determinants of outcome among high-risk patients.
Demographic, procedural, and outcome data from patients with MI were collected at 1073 U.S. hospitals collaborating in the National Registry of MI (NRMI 2). Patients were classified on hospital arrival as either "low risk" or "high risk" according to a modified Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction II Risk Scale based on predetermined demographic, electrocardiographic, and clinical features.
Among the 170,143 patients enrolled, 115,222 (67.5%) were classified as low risk and 55,521 (32.5%) as high risk for in-hospital death, recurrent ischemia, recurrent MI, congestive heart failure, and stroke. Using a composite unsatisfactory outcome measure, in-hospital adverse events were had by a greater proportion of patients initially classified as high risk compared with those classified as low risk. By multivariate analysis, age >70 years, prior MI, Killip class >1, anterior site of infarction, and the combination of hypotension and tachycardia were independent predictions of poor outcome in patients with or without ST-segment elevation on the presenting electrocardiogram. High-risk patients with ST-segment elevation were treated with thrombolytics (47.5%) or alternative forms of reperfusion therapy (9.3%) within 62 minutes and 226 minutes of hospital arrival, respectively. High-risk patients offered reperfusion therapy were also more likely to receive aspirin, beta-blockers (intravenous, oral) and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors within 24 hours of infarction (all p < 0.0001), survive their event (8.4% versus 21.4% p < 0.0001), and leave the hospital sooner than those not reperfused.
This large registry experience included more than 150,000 nonselected patients with MI and suggests that high-risk patients can be identified on initial hospital presentation. The current use of reperfusion and adjunctive therapies among high-risk patients is suboptimal and may directly influence outcome. Randomized trials designed to test the impact of specific management strategies on outcome according to initial risk classification are warranted.
重症患者的治疗决策需要对可用信息进行及时且全面的分析。来自随机临床试验的数据为急性心肌梗死(MI)情况下的风险评估提供了有力工具;然而,及时且恰当地使用现有治疗方法和资源是高危患者预后的关键决定因素。
在美国心肌梗死国家注册研究(NRMI 2)中合作的1073家美国医院收集了MI患者的人口统计学、手术和预后数据。根据基于预先确定的人口统计学、心电图和临床特征的改良心肌梗死溶栓II风险量表,患者在入院时被分类为“低风险”或“高风险”。
在纳入的170143例患者中,115222例(67.5%)被分类为低风险,55521例(32.5%)被分类为院内死亡、复发性缺血、复发性MI、充血性心力衰竭和中风的高风险。使用综合不良结局指标,与低风险患者相比,最初被分类为高风险的患者中发生院内不良事件的比例更高。通过多变量分析,年龄>70岁、既往MI、Killip分级>1、梗死前壁部位以及低血压和心动过速的组合是心电图上有或无ST段抬高的患者预后不良的独立预测因素。ST段抬高的高危患者在入院后62分钟和226分钟内分别接受溶栓治疗(47.5%)或其他形式的再灌注治疗(9.3%)。接受再灌注治疗的高危患者在梗死24小时内也更有可能接受阿司匹林、β受体阻滞剂(静脉、口服)和血管紧张素转换酶抑制剂治疗(所有p<0.0001),事件存活(8.4%对21.4%,p<0.0001),并且比未接受再灌注治疗的患者更早出院。
这项大型注册研究纳入了超过150000例未经选择的MI患者,表明高危患者可在首次入院时被识别。高危患者目前对再灌注和辅助治疗的使用并不理想,可能直接影响预后。有必要开展随机试验,以测试根据初始风险分类的特定管理策略对预后的影响。