INCIDENCE AND PREDICTORS OF ADVERSE EVENTS AMONG INITIALLY STABLE ST-ELEVATION MYOCARDIAL INFARCTION PATIENTS FOLLOWING PRIMARY PERCUTANEOUS CORONARY INTERVENTION: IMPLICATIONS FOR CRITICAL CARE RESOURCE UTILIZATION

2020 ◽  
Vol 36 (10) ◽  
pp. S11-S12
Author(s):  
J. Amon ◽  
C. Fordyce ◽  
G. Wong ◽  
T. Lee ◽  
M. Arnesen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Myocardial Infarction ◽  
Percutaneous Coronary Intervention ◽  
Critical Care ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Resource Utilization ◽  
Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention ◽  
Coronary Intervention ◽  
Percutaneous Coronary ◽  
Critical Care Resource ◽  
St Elevation

scholarly journals Current perspectives on location of monitoring and length of stay following PPCI for ST elevation myocardial infarction

2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (6) ◽  
pp. 562-570 ◽  
Author(s):  
Musa A Sharkawi ◽  
Sean McMahon ◽  
Dania Al Jabri ◽  
Paul D Thompson
Keyword(s):  
Myocardial Infarction ◽  
Percutaneous Coronary Intervention ◽  
Critical Care ◽  
Length Of Stay ◽  
Risk Stratification ◽  
Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention ◽  
Coronary Intervention ◽  
Early Discharge ◽  
Percutaneous Coronary ◽  
St Elevation

Importance: There is marked variability in location of care and hospital length of stay after primary percutaneous coronary intervention for ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). Observations: We performed a literature review on non-critical care monitoring and early discharge following primary percutaneous coronary intervention and describe a framework for implementation in the real world. The medical literature was searched from 1 January 1988 to 31 April 2019 using PubMed and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Randomized clinical trials, observational studies and guideline statements were included. Available data suggest that carefully selected low-risk STEMI patients identified using Zwolle or CADILLAC risk stratification scores after primary percutaneous coronary intervention may be considered for discharge after 48 hours of hospital care. There was no increase in major adverse cardiac events, medication non-compliance or hospital readmission with this treatment strategy. There are limited data on non-critical monitoring of uncomplicated STEMI patients; however, given the low adverse events rate, this strategy is likely to be safe in selected patients and may facilitate reduced length of stay and reduce resource utilization. Conclusions and relevance: Available evidence supports the safety of early discharge after 48 hours of care and omission of critical care monitoring in carefully selected patients following primary percutaneous coronary intervention. Early risk stratification and structured discharge planning are imperative. Adoption of this treatment strategy could reduce hospital costs, resource utilization and enhance patient satisfaction without affecting outcomes.

Optimum Therapies for ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction Managed with Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

2012 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 81
Author(s):  
Bruce R Brodie ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Myocardial Infarction ◽  
Percutaneous Coronary Intervention ◽  
Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention ◽  
Great Majority ◽  
Coronary Intervention ◽  
St Elevation Myocardial Infarction ◽  
Stent Deployment ◽  
Aspiration Thrombectomy ◽  
Percutaneous Coronary ◽  
St Elevation

This article reviews optimum therapies for the management of ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) with primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Optimum anti-thrombotic therapy includes aspirin, bivalirudin and the new anti-platelet agents prasugrel or ticagrelor. Stent thrombosis (ST) has been a major concern but can be reduced by achieving optimal stent deployment, use of prasugrel or ticagrelor, selective use of drug-eluting stents (DES) and use of new generation DES. Large thrombus burden is often associated poor outcomes. Patients with moderate to large thrombus should be managed with aspiration thrombectomy and patients with giant thrombus should be treated with glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors and may require rheolytic thrombectomy. The great majority of STEMI patients presenting at non-PCI hospitals can best be managed with transfer for primary PCI even with substantial delays. A small group of patients who present very early, who are at high clinical risk and have long delays to PCI, may best be treated with a pharmaco-invasive strategy.

scholarly journals Clinical characteristics and long-term mortality of patients with midrange ejection fraction undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention for ST-elevation myocardial infarction

2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (Supplement_2) ◽  
Author(s):  
J Vratonjic ◽  
D Milasinovic ◽  
M Asanin ◽  
V Vukcevic ◽  
S Zaharijev ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Myocardial Infarction ◽  
Percutaneous Coronary Intervention ◽  
Ejection Fraction ◽  
Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention ◽  
Coronary Intervention ◽  
Primary Pci ◽  
Percutaneous Coronary ◽  
St Elevation ◽  
Long Term Mortality

Abstract Background Previous studies associated midrange ejection fraction (mrEF) with impaired prognosis in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). Purpose Our aim was to assess clinical profile and short- and long-term mortality of patients with mrEF after STEMI treated with primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Methods This analysis included 8148 patients admitted for primary PCI during 2009–2019, from a high-volume tertiary center, for whom echocardiographic parameters obtained during index hospitalization were available. Midrange EF was defined as 40–49%. Adjusted Cox regression models were used to assess 30-day and 5-year mortality hazard of mrEF, with the reference category being preserved EF (>50%). Results mrEF was present in 29.8% (n=2 427), whereas low ejection fraction (EF<40%) was documented in 24.7% of patients (n=2 016). mrEF was associated with a higher baseline risk as compared with preserved EF patients, but lower when compared with EF<40%, in terms of prior MI (14.5% in mrEF vs. 9.9% in preserved EF vs. 24.2% in low EF, p<0.001), history of diabetes (26.5% vs. 21.2% vs. 30.0%, p<0.001), presence of Killip 2–4 on admission (15.7% vs. 6.9% vs. 26.5%, p<0.001) and median age (61 vs. 59 vs. 64 years, p<0.001). At 30 days, mortality was comparable in mrEF vs. preserved EF group, while it was significantly higher in the low EF group (2.7% vs. 1.6% vs. 9.4%, respectively, p<0.001). At 5 years, mrEF patients had higher crude mortality rate as compared with preserved EF, but lower in comparison with low EF (25.1% vs. 17.0% vs. 48.7%, p<0.001) (Figure). After adjusting for the observed baseline differences mrEF was independently associated with increased mortality at 5 years (HR 1.283, 95% CI: 1.093–1.505, p=0.002), but not at 30 days (HR 1.444, 95% CI: 0.961–2.171, p<0.001). Conclusion Patients with mrEF after primary PCI for STEMI have a distinct baseline clinical risk profile, as compared with patients with reduced (<40%) and preserved (≥50%) EF. Importantly, mrEF did not have a significant impact on short-term mortality following STEMI, but it did independently predict the risk of 5-year mortality. Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding source: None

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document