Inflammation in acute myocardial infarction: the good, the bad and the ugly.

Convergent experimental and clinical evidence have established the pathophysiological importance of pro-inflammatory pathways in coronary artery disease. Notably, the interest in treating inflammation in patients suffering acute myocardial infarction (AMI) is now expanding from its chronic aspects to the acute setting. Few large outcome trials have proven the benefits of anti-inflammatory therapies on cardiovascular outcomes by targeting the residual inflammatory risk (RIR), i.e. the smouldering ember of low-grade inflammation persisting in the late phase after AMI. However, these studies have also taught us about potential risks of anti-inflammatory therapy after AMI, particularly related to impaired host defence. Recently, numerous smaller-scale trials have addressed the concept of targeting a deleterious flare of excessive inflammation in the early phase after AMI. Targeting different pathways and implementing various treatment regimens, those trials have met with varied degrees of success. Promising results have come from those studies intervening early on the interleukin-1 and -6 pathways. Taking lessons from such past research may inform an optimized approach to target post-AMI inflammation, tailored to spare 'The Good' (repair and defence) while treating 'The Bad' (smouldering RIR) and capturing 'The Ugly' (flaming early burst of excess inflammation in the acute phase). Key constituents of such a strategy may read as follows: select patients with large pro-inflammatory burden (i.e. large AMI); initiate treatment early (e.g. ≤12 h post-AMI); implement a precisely targeted anti-inflammatory agent; follow through with a tapering treatment regimen. This approach warrants testing in rigorous clinical trials.

Acute-on-chronic inflammation in acute myocardial infarction.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Acute myocardial infarction (AMI) is heralded by chronic inflammation and entails an excessive burst of acute-on-chronic inflammation (AoCI). This review describes the evolution from understanding atherosclerosis as a chronic inflammatory disease, to recent efforts in optimizing anti-inflammatory therapy to patients with AMI. It highlights the challenges and opportunities in selecting the optimal patient with AMI to derive maximal benefit from early anti-inflammatory therapy. RECENT FINDINGS: The causal role of inflammation in atherosclerosis has been proven in large outcome trials. Since then, several smaller trials have sought to translate the concept of anti-inflammatory therapy targeting residual inflammatory risk to the dynamic early phase of AoCI after AMI. Current evidence highlights the importance of selecting patients with a high inflammatory burden. Surrogate criteria for large AMI (e.g., angiographic or electrocardiographic), as well as novel point-of-care biomarker testing may aid in selecting patients with particularly elevated AoCI. Additionally, patients presenting with AMI complicated by pro-inflammatory sequelae (e.g., atrial fibrillation, acute heart failure, left ventricular thrombosis) may dually profit from anti-inflammatory therapy. SUMMARY: Improved understanding of the mechanisms and dynamics of acute and chronic inflammatory processes after AMI may aid the strive to optimize early anti-inflammatory therapy to patients with AMI.

Higher 1-year mortality on rest days in patients with acute coronary syndromes and decompensated heart failure-A SPUM-ACS sub-study.

BACKGROUND: Acute coronary syndromes (ACS) occurring on rest days have been associated with higher mortality, but the current literature remains inconsistent in this regard. This study included ACS patients presenting with acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF) investigating the relationship between time of coronary catheterization and outcomes. METHODS: Analyses were performed from the prospective, multicentric Special Program University Medicine Acute Coronary Syndromes and Inflammation (SPUM-ACS) Cohort. Patients were divided into two groups according to time of coronary catheterization on either workdays (Monday, 00:00 to Friday, 23:59) or rest days (Saturday, 00:00 to Sunday, 23:59 and public holidays). ADHF was defined by Killip Class III or IV upon presentation. Patients were followed over 1 year. RESULTS: Out of 4787 ACS patients enrolled in the SPUM-ACS Cohort, 207 (4.3%) presented with ADHF. 52 (25.1%) and 155 (74.9%) patients underwent coronary angiography on rest days or workdays, respectively. Baseline characteristics were similar among these groups. ACS patients with ADHF showed increased 1-year mortality on rest days (34.6% vs. 17.4%, p-value = 0.009). After correction for baseline characteristics, including the GRACE 2.0 Score, rest day presentation remained a significant predictor for 1-year mortality (adjusted hazard ratio = 2.42 [95% confidence interval: 1.14-5.17], p-value = 0.022). CONCLUSIONS: One-year all-cause mortality was high in ACS patients with ADHF and doubled for patients admitted on rest days. The present data support the association of a rest day effect and long-term patient survival and indicate a need for further investigations.