Prospective evaluation of clinical outcomes after acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction in patients who are ineligible for reperfusion therapy: Preliminary results from the TETAMI registry and randomized trial

Article

关键词: INTRAVENOUS UNFRACTIONATED HEPARIN;    PRIMARY CORONARY ANGIOPLASTY;    THROMBOLYTIC THERAPY;    SUBCUTANEOUS ENOXAPARIN;    HOSPITAL OUTCOMES;    NATIONAL REGISTRY;    ELDERLY-PATIENTS;    GLOBAL REGISTRY;    Q-WAVE;    MANAGEMENT;   

DOI  :  10.1161/01.CIR.0000086952.14979.32

来源: SCIE

【 摘 要 】

Background-Treatment with lytics or primary percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) reduces the mortality rate of patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) presenting within 12 hours. Patients presenting >12 hours are generally considered to be ineligible for reperfusion therapy, and there are currently no specific treatment recommendations for this subgroup. Methods-All patients with STEMI <24 hours were included in the Treatment with Enoxaparin and Tirofiban in Acute Myocardial Infarction (TETAMI) randomized trial or registry. Those patients who were ineligible for acute reperfusion, had no cardiogenic shock, and were not planned for revascularization within 48 hours were randomized to I of 4 antithrombotic regimens involving enoxaparin or unfractionated heparin (UFH), in combination with tirofiban or placebo for 2 to 8 days. A concurrent registry tracked STEMI patients coming in within <12 hours, and who underwent reperfusion. This registry also tracked the remaining, STEMI patients who neither received reperfusion nor were enrolled in the TETAMI randomized trial. The demographics and clinical outcomes of all three groups (received reperfusion therapy, too late for reperfusion and enrolled in the randomized trial, neither received reperfusion therapy nor were enrolled in the randomized trial) were prospectively tracked. Results and Conclusion-There were 2,737 patients who presented with STEMI or a new left branch bundle block (LBBB), of which 1,654 (60%) presented less than or equal to12 hours. There were 1, 196 (72%) of 1,654 patients who received reperfusion therapy. There were 458 (28%) of the 1,654 patients deemed ineligible for reperfusion, mostly because of a contraindication to lytics or for being too old. In contrast, 1,083 (40%) of 2,737 patients presented >12 hours. Apart from 34 of these patients who had a stuttering infarction and were referred for reperfusion, the remaining patients did not receive reperfusion therapy. Registry patients who received reperfusion therapy, compared with TETAMI randomized patients (all of whom received antithrombotic therapy) and registry patients who did not receive reperfusion, were younger (61 years versus 63 years and 67 years), were more likely to be male (78% versus 73% and 63%), and had persistent ST-segment elevation as opposed to LBBB or Q waves. Registry patients who received reperfusion therapy had better clinical outcomes, even after adjusting for admission Killip class, compared with TETAMI randomized patients and registry patients who did not receive reperfusion therapy. TETAMI randomized patients had better outcomes than registry patients who did not receive reperfusion therapy. The major obstacle to expanding the delivery of reperfusion therapy to patients with STEMI is the large fraction of patients who present too late for reperfusion therapy. Examination of prospectively gathered data on STEMI patients who are ineligible for reperfusion may help optimize their treatment.

【 授权许可】

Free