首页> 外文期刊>Cardiovascular journal of Africa. >Comparison of outcomes in ST-segment depression and ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction patients treated with emergency PCI: Data from a multicentre registry
【24h】

Comparison of outcomes in ST-segment depression and ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction patients treated with emergency PCI: Data from a multicentre registry

机译:急诊PCI治疗ST段压低和ST段抬高型心肌梗死患者的结局比较:来自多中心注册表的数据

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Background: Traditionally, acute myocardial infarction (AMI) has been described as either STEMI (ST-elevation myocardial infarction) or non-STEMI myocardial infarction. This classification is historically related to the use of thrombolytic therapy, which is effective in STEMI. The current era of widespread use of coronary angiography (CAG), usually followed by primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) puts this classification system into question. Objectives: To compare the outcomes of patients with STEMI and ST-depression myocardial infarction (STDMI) who were treated with emergency PCI. Methods: This multicentre registry enrolled a total of 6 602 consecutive patients with AMI. Patients were divided into the following subgroups: STEMI (n = 3446), STDMI (n = 907), left bundle branch block (LBBB) AMI (n = 241), right bundle branch block (RBBB) AMI (n = 338) and other electrocardiographic (ECG) AMI (n = 1670). Baseline and angiographic characteristics were studied, and revascularisation therapies and in-hospital mortality were analysed. Results: Acute heart failure was present in 29.5% of the STDMI vs 27.4% of the STEMI patients (p < 0.001). STDMI patients had more extensive coronary atherosclerosis than patients with STEMI (three-vessel disease: 53.1 vs 30%, p <0.001). The left main coronary artery was an infract-related artery (IRA) in 6.0% of STDMI vs 1.1% of STEMI patients (p < 0.001). TIMI flow 0-1 was found in 35.0% of STDMI vs 66.0% of STEMI patients (p < 0.001). Primary PCI was performed in 88.1% of STEMI (with a success rate of 90.8%) vs 61.8% of STDMI patients (with a success rate of 94.5%) (p = 0.012 for PCI success rates). In-hospital mortality was not significantly different (STDMI 6.3 vs STEMI 5.4%, p = 0.330). Conclusion: These data suggest that similar strategies (emergency CAG with PCI whenever feasible) should be applied to both these types of AMI.
机译:背景:传统上,急性心肌梗塞(AMI)被描述为STEMI(ST抬高型心肌梗塞)或非STEMI心肌梗塞。这种分类在历史上与溶栓治疗的使用有关,溶栓治疗在STEMI中有效。当前广泛使用冠状动脉造影(CAG)的时代,通常是在主要的经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)之后,对该分类系统提出了质疑。目的:比较接受急诊PCI治疗的STEMI和ST抑郁性心肌梗死(STDMI)患者的结局。方法:该多中心注册表共纳入了6 602名连续的AMI患者。患者分为以下亚组:STEMI(n = 3446),STDMI(n = 907),左束支传导阻滞(LBBB)AMI(n = 241),右束支传导阻滞(RBBB)AMI(n = 338)和其他心电图(ECG)AMI(n = 1670)。研究了基线和血管造影的特征,并分析了血运重建疗法和院内死亡率。结果:STDMI患者中有29.5%出现急性心力衰竭,而STEMI患者中则为27.4%(p <0.001)。 STDMI患者比STEMI患者具有更广泛的冠状动脉粥样硬化(三支血管疾病:53.1 vs 30%,p <0.001)。左主干冠状动脉为梗塞相关动脉(IRA),占STDMI的6.0%,而对STEMI的患者为1.1%(p <0.001)。在STDMI的35.0%和STEMI患者的66.0%中发现TIMI流0-1(p <0.001)。 STEMI的88.1%(成功率为90.8%)与STDMI患者的61.8%(成功率为94.5%)进行了原发PCI(PCI成功率为p = 0.012)。院内死亡率无显着差异(STDMI 6.3 vs STEMI 5.4%,p = 0.330)。结论:这些数据表明,对这两种类型的AMI都应采用类似的策略(在可行时采用PCI紧急CAG)。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号