Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 3 de 3
Filtrar
Mais filtros

Base de dados
Tipo de documento
Intervalo de ano de publicação
2.
Am J Cardiol ; 125(1): 1-10, 2020 01 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31685213

RESUMO

The benefit-risk ratio of a pharmacoinvasive strategy (PI) in patients ≥70 years of age with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) remains uncertain resulting in its limited use in this population. This study compared efficacy and safety of PI with primary percutaneous coronary intervention (pPCI). Data from 2,841 patients (mean age: 78.1 ± 5.6 years, female: 36.1%) included in a prospective multicenter registry, and who underwent either PI (n = 269) or pPCI (n = 2,572), were analyzed. The primary end point was in-hospital major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) defined as the composite of all-cause mortality, nonfatal MI, stroke, and definite stent thrombosis. Secondary end points included all-cause death, major bleeding, net adverse clinical events, and the development of in-hospital Killip class III or IV heart failure. Propensity-score matching and conditional logistic regression were used to adjust for confounders. Within the matched cohort, rates of MACE was not statistically different between the PI (n = 247) and pPCI (n = 958) groups, (11.3% vs 9.0%, respectively, odds ratio 1.25, 95% confidence interval 0.81 to 1.94; p = 0.31). Secondary end points were comparable between groups at the exception of a lower rate of development of Killip class III or IV heart failure after PI. The rate of intracranial hemorrhage was significantly higher in the PI group (2.3% vs 0.0%, p = 0.03). In conclusion, the present study demonstrated no difference regarding in-hospital MACE following PI or pPCI in STEMI patients ≥70 years of age. An adequately-powered randomized trial is needed to precisely define the role of PI in this high-risk subgroup.


Assuntos
Intervenção Coronária Percutânea/normas , Guias de Prática Clínica como Assunto , Sistema de Registros , Infarto do Miocárdio com Supradesnível do Segmento ST/terapia , Terapia Trombolítica/normas , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Causas de Morte/tendências , Feminino , Seguimentos , França/epidemiologia , Mortalidade Hospitalar/tendências , Humanos , Masculino , Intervenção Coronária Percutânea/métodos , Prognóstico , Estudos Prospectivos , Fatores de Risco , Infarto do Miocárdio com Supradesnível do Segmento ST/mortalidade , Taxa de Sobrevida/tendências , Terapia Trombolítica/métodos , Tempo para o Tratamento
3.
Arch Cardiovasc Dis ; 111(11): 656-665, 2018 Nov.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29229216

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Recent studies demonstrated the superiority of complete revascularization (CR) in patients treated by primary percutaneous coronary intervention (pPCI) in ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). AIM: To evaluate whether immediate CR improves in-hospital outcomes in patients with STEMI with multivessel disease. METHODS: Data from a prospective multicentre registry including 9365 patients with STEMI were analysed. Patients with multivessel disease and treated with pPCI (n=3412) were included and separated into two groups according to whether immediate CR was performed during the index procedure. The primary endpoint was in-hospital major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), defined as a composite of all-cause death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, stroke and definite stent thrombosis. Secondary endpoints were individual components of MACE and major bleeding. Multivariable Cox regression and propensity-score adjustment were performed to account for confounders. RESULTS: Immediate CR was performed in 98 patients (2.9%), whereas 3314 patients (97.1%) were incompletely revascularized. The prevalence of severe heart failure (Killip class III or IV) and significant lesions of the left main coronary artery were higher in the immediate CR group (21.6% vs. 13.5% and 24.5% vs. 6.7%, respectively; P<0.001 for both). After adjustment, immediate CR was not associated with reduced rates of MACE (hazard ratio [HR] 0.64, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.31-1.35; P=0.24) or all-cause death (HR: 0.52, 95% CI: 0.23-1.16; P=0.11), but with increased risks of definite stent thrombosis (HR: 3.93, 95% CI: 1.12-13.75; P=0.03) and major bleeding (HR: 17.46, 95% CI: 2.29-133.17; P=0.006). CONCLUSION: Immediate CR did not improve in-hospital outcomes of patients with STEMI with multivessel disease in this analysis. Randomized studies are warranted to elucidate the optimal timing of CR in patients with STEMI.


Assuntos
Doença da Artéria Coronariana/cirurgia , Intervenção Coronária Percutânea , Infarto do Miocárdio com Supradesnível do Segmento ST/cirurgia , Tempo para o Tratamento , Idoso , Doença da Artéria Coronariana/diagnóstico por imagem , Doença da Artéria Coronariana/mortalidade , Trombose Coronária/etiologia , Feminino , França , Hemorragia/etiologia , Mortalidade Hospitalar , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Intervenção Coronária Percutânea/efeitos adversos , Intervenção Coronária Percutânea/mortalidade , Recidiva , Sistema de Registros , Estudos Retrospectivos , Fatores de Risco , Infarto do Miocárdio com Supradesnível do Segmento ST/diagnóstico por imagem , Infarto do Miocárdio com Supradesnível do Segmento ST/mortalidade , Acidente Vascular Cerebral/etiologia , Fatores de Tempo , Resultado do Tratamento
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA