Heart failure with systolic dysfunction complicating acute myocardial infarction - differential outcomes but similar eplerenone efficacy by ST-segment or non-ST-segment elevation: A post hoc substudy of the EPHESUS trial.

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Differential outcomes in patients with acute systolic heart failure (HF) complicating acute myocardial infarction (AMI) and the efficacy of mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists according to non-ST-segment and ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI, STEMI) status has not been specifically investigated. METHODS: In the EPHESUS study, 6632 patients with acute HF and left ventricular ejection fraction<40% were randomized 3-14 days post-AMI (median 7.3 ± 3.0 days) to receive eplerenone (n=3319) or placebo (n=3313). Among them, 6392 patients with available data on baseline ST-segment status (4634 STEMI; 1758 NSTEMI) were compared using a Cox model analysis stratified according to quintiles of propensity score (PS), taking into account major baseline risk factors, including revascularization. RESULTS: STEMI and NSTEMI patients differed significantly across a large variety of baseline characteristics. During 30 months of follow-up, all-cause death occurred in 19% and 13% (P<0.0001), cardiovascular death in 16% and 12% (P<0.0001), cardiovascular death and hospitalization in 33% and 26% (P<0.0001) and death from progression of HF in 5% and 3% (P<0.0001) of unadjusted NSTEMI and STEMI patients, respectively. After Cox model PS adjustment without revascularization, NSTEMI status still proved to be a risk factor for all-cause death, cardiovascular death and death from progression of HF. After Cox model PS adjustment including revascularization, none of the outcomes differed between STEMI and NSTEMI patients. Eplerenone morbidity and mortality benefits were consistent in the STEMI and NSTEMI subgroups. CONCLUSION: In patients with acute systolic HF complicating AMI, eplerenone improves outcomes equally in STEMI and NSTEMI patients. Worse outcomes associated with NSTEMI could be explained by more co-morbidities, less aggressive therapies and, mainly, less frequent revascularization.