Early exercise stress testing is safe after primary percutaneous coronary intervention.

BACKGROUND: The optimal timing of exercise stress testing post primary percutaneous coronary intervention is uncertain with anecdotal evidence suggesting an increased risk of acute myocardial infarction and/or death if performed too early. This has translated into a delayed return to normal life activities following an acute myocardial infarction resulting in an increase in socio-economic burden. AIMS: We hypothesize that early (within 7 days of primary percutaneous coronary intervention) exercise stress testing is safe. METHODS: A prospective study of consecutive patients enrolled into the Cardiac Rehabilitation Program at a tertiary referral centre that underwent primary percutaneous coronary intervention, and who were able to perform a treadmill stress test were recruited. Timing of exercise stress testing was within 7 days post primary percutaneous coronary intervention and outcomes of death, acute myocardial infarction and other major adverse cardiac event were assessed 24 hours post exercise stress testing. RESULTS: Recruited patients (n=230) aged between 29 and 78 (mean age 56 ± 10 years) with 191 being males (83%) and 39 being females (17%). While 28 patients had a positive stress test (12.2%), there were no deaths, acute myocardial infarction or any other major adverse cardiac event within 24 hours of performing the exercise stress testing. Mean METS achieved were 8.1 ± 2.3. CONCLUSIONS: Early exercise stress testing after primary percutaneous coronary intervention appears safe.

Economic evaluation of a randomised trial of early return to normal activities versus cardiac rehabilitation after acute myocardial infarction.

BACKGROUND: Although there have been a number of economic evaluations of cardiac rehabilitation after acute myocardial infarction (AMI), none has considered only low-risk patients or control groups with no rehabilitation at all. METHODS: An economic evaluation was included in a randomised controlled trial of patients following uncomplicated AMI. Eligible patients were randomised to return to normal activities after 6 weeks of standard rehabilitation (REHAB, n = 70) or to early return to normal activities 2 weeks after AMI with no formal rehabilitation (ERNA, n = 72). Outcomes were assessed weekly for 6 weeks, then 3, 6 and 12 months post-AMI. Outcomes included four quality of life (QOL) measures (physical abilities, distress, usual/social activities, self-care) and four measures of return to normal activities (paid and unpaid return to any work and to pre-AMI level of work). Statistical analysis included repeated-measures regression (QOL outcomes) and survival analysis (work outcomes). RESULTS: There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups in any of the outcomes measured or in the use of other health services. The net cost that could be saved by the health service by targeting rehabilitation to high-risk patients was approximately $300 (Australian, 1999) per low-risk patient. CONCLUSIONS: Early return to normal activities without formal rehabilitation is cost-effective for low-risk patients.