Are patients with non-ST elevation myocardial infarction undertreated?
Open Access
- 5 March 2007
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Springer Nature in BMC Cardiovascular Disorders
- Vol. 7 (1) , 8
- https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2261-7-8
Abstract
Background The worse prognosis in patients without ST-elevation (non-STEMI) as compared to ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), may be due to treatment differences. We aimed to evaluate the differences in characteristics, treatment and outcome in patients with non-STEMI versus STEMI in an unselected patient population. Methods Individual patient data from all patients in our hospital with a discharge diagnosis of MI between Jan 2001 and Jan 2002 were evaluated. Follow-up data were obtained until December 2004. Patients were categorized according to the presenting electrocardiogram into non-STEMI or STEMI. Results A total of 824 patients were discharged with a diagnosis of MI, 29% with non-STEMI and 71% with STEMI. Patients with non-STEMI were significantly older and had a higher cardiovascular risk profile. They underwent less frequently coronary angiography and revascularization and received less often clopidogrel and ACE-inhibitor on discharge. Long-term mortality was significantly higher in the non-STEMI patients as compared to STEMI patients, 20% vs. 12%, p = 0.006, respectively. However, multivariate analysis showed that age, diabetes, hypertension and no reperfusion therapy (but not non-STEMI presentation) were independent and significant predictors of long-term mortality. Conclusion In an unselected cohort of patients discharged with MI, there were significant differences in baseline characteristics, and (invasive) treatment between STEMI and non-STEMI. Long-term mortality was also different, but this was due to differences in baseline characteristics and treatment. More aggressive treatment may improve outcome in non-STEMI patients.Keywords
This publication has 38 references indexed in Scilit:
- Correlation between the TIMI risk score and high-risk angiographic findings in non–ST-elevation acute coronary syndromes: Observations from the Platelet Receptor Inhibition in Ischemic Syndrome Management in Patients Limited by Unstable Signs and Symptoms (PRISM-PLUS) trialAmerican Heart Journal, 2005
- External validity of randomised controlled trials: “To whom do the results of this trial apply?”The Lancet, 2005
- Acute angiographic analysis of non–ST-segment elevation acute myocardial infarctionThe American Journal of Cardiology, 2004
- Six-month outcomes in a multinational registry of patients hospitalized with an acute coronary syndrome (The Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events [GRACE])The American Journal of Cardiology, 2004
- Changing the model of care for patients with acute coronary syndromesAmerican Heart Journal, 2003
- One-year follow-up of the ASSENT-2 trial: A double-blind, randomized comparison of single-bolus tenecteplase and front-loaded alteplase in 16,949 patients with ST-elevation acute myocardial infarctionAmerican Heart Journal, 2003
- Primary angioplasty versus intravenous thrombolytic therapy for acute myocardial infarction: a quantitative review of 23 randomised trialsPublished by Elsevier ,2003
- Reperfusion therapy for acute myocardial infarction with fibrinolytic therapy or combination reduced fibrinolytic therapy and platelet glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibition: the GUSTO V randomised trialThe Lancet, 2001
- Myocardial infarction redefined—a consensus document of The Joint European Society of Cardiology/American College of Cardiology committee for the redefinition of myocardial infarctionJournal of the American College of Cardiology, 2000
- Indications for fibrinolytic therapy in suspected acute myocardial infarction: collaborative overview of early mortality and major morbidity results from all randomised trials of more than 1000 patientsPublished by Elsevier ,1994