Health-Status Outcomes in Older Patients With Myocardial Infarction: Physiology-Guided Complete Revascularization Versus Culprit-Only Strategy.

IF 6.2 2区 医学 Q1 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS Circulation-Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes Pub Date : 2024-07-01 Epub Date: 2024-06-18 DOI:10.1161/CIRCOUTCOMES.123.010490
Gianluca Campo, Vincenzo Guiducci, Javier Escaned, Raul Moreno, Gianni Casella, Caterina Cavazza, Enrico Cerrato, Marco Contarini, Marco Arena, Andres Iniguez Romo, Enrique Gutiérrez Ibañes, Roberto Scarsini, Giuseppe Vadalà, Giuseppe Andò, Gerlando Pilato, Sergio Musto d'Amore, Alessandro Capecchi, Ramiro Trillo Nouche, Elisabetta Moscarella, Alfonso Gambino, Marco Pavani, Anna Zanetti, Nicola Pesenti, Dariusz Dudek, Emanuele Barbato, Matteo Tebaldi, Simone Biscaglia
{"title":"Health-Status Outcomes in Older Patients With Myocardial Infarction: Physiology-Guided Complete Revascularization Versus Culprit-Only Strategy.","authors":"Gianluca Campo, Vincenzo Guiducci, Javier Escaned, Raul Moreno, Gianni Casella, Caterina Cavazza, Enrico Cerrato, Marco Contarini, Marco Arena, Andres Iniguez Romo, Enrique Gutiérrez Ibañes, Roberto Scarsini, Giuseppe Vadalà, Giuseppe Andò, Gerlando Pilato, Sergio Musto d'Amore, Alessandro Capecchi, Ramiro Trillo Nouche, Elisabetta Moscarella, Alfonso Gambino, Marco Pavani, Anna Zanetti, Nicola Pesenti, Dariusz Dudek, Emanuele Barbato, Matteo Tebaldi, Simone Biscaglia","doi":"10.1161/CIRCOUTCOMES.123.010490","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The FIRE trial (Functional Assessment in Elderly Myocardial Infarction Patients With Multivessel Disease) enrolled 1445 older (aged ≥75 years) patients with myocardial infarction and multivessel disease in Italy, Spain, and Poland. Patients were randomized to physiology-guided complete revascularization or treatment of the only culprit lesion. Physiology-guided complete revascularization significantly reduced ischemic adverse events at 1 year. This prespecified analysis investigated the changes between the 2 study groups in angina status, quality of life, physical performance, and frailty.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patients underwent validated scales at hospital discharge (baseline) and 1 year later. Angina status was evaluated using the Seattle Angina Questionnaire, health-related quality of life by EQ visual analog scale, physical performance by short physical performance battery, and frailty by the clinical frailty scale. Mixed models for repeated measures analysis were used to study the association between the treatment arms, time, and scales.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Baseline and 1-year Seattle Angina Questionnaire, EQ visual analog scale, short physical performance battery, and clinical frailty scale were collected in around two-thirds of the entire FIRE study population. The mean age was 80.9±4.6 years (female sex, 35.9%). Overall, 35.3% were admitted for ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction, whereas the others were admitted for non-ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction. Physiology-guided complete revascularization, compared with culprit-only revascularization, was associated with greater improvement in terms of angina status (Seattle Angina Questionnaire summary score, 7.3 [95% CI, 6.1-8.6] points), health-related quality of life (EQ visual analog scale, 6.2 [95% CI, 4.4-8.1] points), and physical performance (short physical performance battery, 1.1 [95% CI, 0.9-1.3] points). After 1 year, patients randomized to culprit-only revascularization experienced a deterioration in frailty status (clinical frailty scale, 0.2 [95% CI, 0.1-0.3] points), which was not observed in patients randomized to physiology-guided complete revascularization.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The present analysis suggested that a physiology-guided complete revascularization is associated with consistent benefits in terms of angina status, quality of life, physical performance, and the absence of further deterioration of the frailty status.</p><p><strong>Registration: </strong>URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT03772743.</p>","PeriodicalId":49221,"journal":{"name":"Circulation-Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes","volume":" ","pages":"e010490"},"PeriodicalIF":6.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Circulation-Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCOUTCOMES.123.010490","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/6/18 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The FIRE trial (Functional Assessment in Elderly Myocardial Infarction Patients With Multivessel Disease) enrolled 1445 older (aged ≥75 years) patients with myocardial infarction and multivessel disease in Italy, Spain, and Poland. Patients were randomized to physiology-guided complete revascularization or treatment of the only culprit lesion. Physiology-guided complete revascularization significantly reduced ischemic adverse events at 1 year. This prespecified analysis investigated the changes between the 2 study groups in angina status, quality of life, physical performance, and frailty.

Methods: Patients underwent validated scales at hospital discharge (baseline) and 1 year later. Angina status was evaluated using the Seattle Angina Questionnaire, health-related quality of life by EQ visual analog scale, physical performance by short physical performance battery, and frailty by the clinical frailty scale. Mixed models for repeated measures analysis were used to study the association between the treatment arms, time, and scales.

Results: Baseline and 1-year Seattle Angina Questionnaire, EQ visual analog scale, short physical performance battery, and clinical frailty scale were collected in around two-thirds of the entire FIRE study population. The mean age was 80.9±4.6 years (female sex, 35.9%). Overall, 35.3% were admitted for ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction, whereas the others were admitted for non-ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction. Physiology-guided complete revascularization, compared with culprit-only revascularization, was associated with greater improvement in terms of angina status (Seattle Angina Questionnaire summary score, 7.3 [95% CI, 6.1-8.6] points), health-related quality of life (EQ visual analog scale, 6.2 [95% CI, 4.4-8.1] points), and physical performance (short physical performance battery, 1.1 [95% CI, 0.9-1.3] points). After 1 year, patients randomized to culprit-only revascularization experienced a deterioration in frailty status (clinical frailty scale, 0.2 [95% CI, 0.1-0.3] points), which was not observed in patients randomized to physiology-guided complete revascularization.

Conclusions: The present analysis suggested that a physiology-guided complete revascularization is associated with consistent benefits in terms of angina status, quality of life, physical performance, and the absence of further deterioration of the frailty status.

Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT03772743.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
老年心肌梗死患者的健康状况结果:生理学指导下的完全血管再通术与仅针对病灶的策略。
研究背景FIRE试验(多血管疾病老年心肌梗死患者功能评估)在意大利、西班牙和波兰招募了1445名患有心肌梗死和多血管疾病的老年患者(年龄≥75岁)。患者被随机分配接受生理学指导下的完全血管再通或治疗唯一的罪魁祸首病变。生理学指导下的完全血运重建大大减少了1年后的缺血性不良事件。本预设分析调查了两个研究组在心绞痛状态、生活质量、体能表现和虚弱程度方面的变化:患者在出院时(基线)和1年后接受了有效的量表测试。心绞痛状况采用西雅图心绞痛问卷进行评估,健康相关生活质量采用 EQ 视觉模拟量表进行评估,体能表现采用短期体能表现量表进行评估,虚弱程度采用临床虚弱量表进行评估。采用混合模型进行重复测量分析,研究治疗组、时间和量表之间的关联:在整个 FIRE 研究人群中,约有三分之二的人接受了基线和 1 年西雅图心绞痛问卷调查、EQ 视觉模拟量表、短期体能测试和临床虚弱量表。平均年龄为(80.9±4.6)岁(女性占 35.9%)。总体而言,35.3%的患者因ST段抬高型心肌梗死入院,其他患者则因非ST段抬高型心肌梗死入院。生理学指导下的完全血运重建与单纯罪魁祸首血运重建相比,在心绞痛状态(西雅图心绞痛问卷总分,7.3[95% CI,6.1-8.6]分)、健康相关生活质量(EQ视觉模拟量表,6.2[95% CI,4.4-8.1]分)和体能(短期体能测试,1.1[95% CI,0.9-1.3]分)方面都有更大改善。1年后,随机接受仅罪魁祸首血运重建的患者的虚弱状态(临床虚弱量表,0.2 [95% CI, 0.1-0.3]分)有所恶化,而随机接受生理学指导下完全血运重建的患者没有观察到这种情况:目前的分析表明,生理指导下的完全血管再通与心绞痛状态、生活质量、体能表现以及虚弱状态不再进一步恶化方面的持续获益相关:URL:https://www.clinicaltrials.gov;唯一标识符:NCT03772743。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Circulation-Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes
Circulation-Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS-
CiteScore
8.50
自引率
2.90%
发文量
357
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Circulation: Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes, an American Heart Association journal, publishes articles related to improving cardiovascular health and health care. Content includes original research, reviews, and case studies relevant to clinical decision-making and healthcare policy. The online-only journal is dedicated to furthering the mission of promoting safe, effective, efficient, equitable, timely, and patient-centered care. Through its articles and contributions, the journal equips you with the knowledge you need to improve clinical care and population health, and allows you to engage in scholarly activities of consequence to the health of the public. Circulation: Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes considers the following types of articles: Original Research Articles, Data Reports, Methods Papers, Cardiovascular Perspectives, Care Innovations, Novel Statistical Methods, Policy Briefs, Data Visualizations, and Caregiver or Patient Viewpoints.
期刊最新文献
Association Between Socioeconomic Disadvantage and Risks of Early and Recurrent Admissions Among Patients With Newly Diagnosed Heart Failure. Patient Preferences for Features Associated With Leadless Versus Conventional Transvenous Cardiac Pacemakers. Posttraumatic Stress Disorder and the Risk of Heart Failure Hospitalizations Among Individuals With Coronary Artery Disease. Artificial Intelligence Applications for Electrocardiography to Define New Digital Biomarkers of Cardiovascular Risk. Prognostic Significance and Associations of Neural Network-Derived Electrocardiographic Features.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1