UNFOLDING THE REALITY OF SMOKING PARADOX IN PATIENTS PRESENTING WITH STE-ACS UNDERGOING PRIMARY PERCUTANEOUS CORONARY TREATMENT

IF 0.2 Q4 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS Pakistan Heart Journal Pub Date : 2022-11-17 DOI:10.47144/phj.v55isupplement1.2418
M. Siddiqui, Rajesh Kumar, J. Sial, M. Karim
{"title":"UNFOLDING THE REALITY OF SMOKING PARADOX IN PATIENTS PRESENTING WITH STE-ACS UNDERGOING PRIMARY PERCUTANEOUS CORONARY TREATMENT","authors":"M. Siddiqui, Rajesh Kumar, J. Sial, M. Karim","doi":"10.47144/phj.v55isupplement1.2418","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objectives: Main objective for this study to unfold this controversy in South Asian population in terms of clinical, angiographic parameters and its in-hospital outcomes. \nMethodology: In this study, we included 1756 consecutive patients diagnosed with STEMI undergoing primary PCI. Patients were classified into smokers and nonsmokers. Comparison was done on the basis of baseline characteristics, clinical presentation, angiographic features and in-hospital mortality between two groups. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to evaluate the paradoxical role of smoking. \nResults: Smokers were younger (53.78±11.16 years vs. 56.43±11.17 years; p<0.001) and more frequently male (98.7% vs. 69.9%; p<0.001), and had less diabetes (19.6% vs. 44.8%; p<0.001) and hypertension (38.5% vs. 64.9%; p<0.001). Smokers presented less frequently in Killip III (5.6% vs. 8.1%; p<0.001) and Killip IV (2.5% vs. 4.8%; p<0.001) in smokers group. Smokers mostly had single vessel disease (41.7% vs. 34.4%; p=0.013) whereas non-smokers had complex disease and frequently presented with total occlusion of the culprit vessel (64.6% vs. 58.8%; p=0.040). Complication such as slow flow/no-flow (24.3% vs. 33.2%; p<0.001) and cardiogenic shock (2.3% vs. 4.6%; p<0.001) were also seen less often among smokers. Smokers has significantly lesser mortality (1.8% vs. 4.3%; p=0.009) compared to non-smokers with an odds ratio (OR) of 0.41 [95% CI: 0.21-0.82, p=0.011], however, adjusted OR on multivariable analysis was 0.67 [95% CI: 0.31-1.41, p=0.290]. Independent predictors of mortality were found to be history of CVA/stroke, pre-procedure LVEDP, multi-vessel diseases, and RBS in ER adjusted OR of 3.83 [95% CI: 1.24-11.79; p=0.019], 1.07 [95% CI: 1.03-1.12; p=0.002], 2.2 [95% CI: 1.07-4.54; p=0.033], and 1 [95% CI: 1.0-1.01; p=0.032], respectively. \nConclusion: The controversial phenomenon of smoking paradox seems to be unfolded in South Asian population in post STE-ACS patients. The paradoxical protective role of smoking is confounding effect of mainly younger age, less coronary artery disease burden and complexity, lower prevalence of diabetes and hypertension and lower rate of Killip III/IV at presentation. Hence, the protective effect is insignificant in multivariable analysis and history of CVA/stroke, pre-procedure LVEDP, multi-vessel diseases, and RBS in ER were found to be independent predictors of in-hospital mortality.","PeriodicalId":42273,"journal":{"name":"Pakistan Heart Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pakistan Heart Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.47144/phj.v55isupplement1.2418","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: Main objective for this study to unfold this controversy in South Asian population in terms of clinical, angiographic parameters and its in-hospital outcomes. Methodology: In this study, we included 1756 consecutive patients diagnosed with STEMI undergoing primary PCI. Patients were classified into smokers and nonsmokers. Comparison was done on the basis of baseline characteristics, clinical presentation, angiographic features and in-hospital mortality between two groups. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to evaluate the paradoxical role of smoking. Results: Smokers were younger (53.78±11.16 years vs. 56.43±11.17 years; p<0.001) and more frequently male (98.7% vs. 69.9%; p<0.001), and had less diabetes (19.6% vs. 44.8%; p<0.001) and hypertension (38.5% vs. 64.9%; p<0.001). Smokers presented less frequently in Killip III (5.6% vs. 8.1%; p<0.001) and Killip IV (2.5% vs. 4.8%; p<0.001) in smokers group. Smokers mostly had single vessel disease (41.7% vs. 34.4%; p=0.013) whereas non-smokers had complex disease and frequently presented with total occlusion of the culprit vessel (64.6% vs. 58.8%; p=0.040). Complication such as slow flow/no-flow (24.3% vs. 33.2%; p<0.001) and cardiogenic shock (2.3% vs. 4.6%; p<0.001) were also seen less often among smokers. Smokers has significantly lesser mortality (1.8% vs. 4.3%; p=0.009) compared to non-smokers with an odds ratio (OR) of 0.41 [95% CI: 0.21-0.82, p=0.011], however, adjusted OR on multivariable analysis was 0.67 [95% CI: 0.31-1.41, p=0.290]. Independent predictors of mortality were found to be history of CVA/stroke, pre-procedure LVEDP, multi-vessel diseases, and RBS in ER adjusted OR of 3.83 [95% CI: 1.24-11.79; p=0.019], 1.07 [95% CI: 1.03-1.12; p=0.002], 2.2 [95% CI: 1.07-4.54; p=0.033], and 1 [95% CI: 1.0-1.01; p=0.032], respectively. Conclusion: The controversial phenomenon of smoking paradox seems to be unfolded in South Asian population in post STE-ACS patients. The paradoxical protective role of smoking is confounding effect of mainly younger age, less coronary artery disease burden and complexity, lower prevalence of diabetes and hypertension and lower rate of Killip III/IV at presentation. Hence, the protective effect is insignificant in multivariable analysis and history of CVA/stroke, pre-procedure LVEDP, multi-vessel diseases, and RBS in ER were found to be independent predictors of in-hospital mortality.
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
在接受直接经皮冠状动脉治疗的STE-ACS患者中揭示吸烟悖论的现实
目的:本研究的主要目的是揭示南亚人群在临床、血管造影参数及其住院结果方面的争议。方法:在这项研究中,我们纳入了1756例连续诊断为STEMI并接受初级PCI治疗的患者。患者分为吸烟者和非吸烟者。比较两组患者的基线特征、临床表现、血管造影特征和住院死亡率。采用多变量logistic回归分析来评估吸烟的矛盾作用。结果:吸烟者年龄较轻(53.78±11.16岁∶56.43±11.17岁);P <0.001),男性更常见(98.7%比69.9%;P <0.001),糖尿病患者较少(19.6% vs. 44.8%;P <0.001)和高血压(38.5% vs. 64.9%;p < 0.001)。Killip III期吸烟者出现的频率较低(5.6%比8.1%;p<0.001)和Killip IV (2.5% vs. 4.8%;P <0.001)。吸烟者多为单血管疾病(41.7% vs. 34.4%;P =0.013),而非吸烟者有复杂的疾病,经常表现为罪魁祸首血管完全闭塞(64.6% vs. 58.8%;p = 0.040)。并发症如慢流/无流(24.3% vs. 33.2%;P <0.001)和心源性休克(2.3% vs. 4.6%;P <0.001)在吸烟者中也较少见。吸烟者的死亡率明显较低(1.8% vs. 4.3%;p=0.009)与非吸烟者相比,优势比(OR)为0.41 [95% CI: 0.21-0.82, p=0.011],然而,多变量分析调整后的OR为0.67 [95% CI: 0.31-1.41, p=0.290]。CVA/卒中史、术前LVEDP、多血管疾病和RBS是死亡率的独立预测因素,经ER调整的OR为3.83 [95% CI: 1.24-11.79;p=0.019], 1.07 [95% CI: 1.03-1.12;p=0.002], 2.2 [95% CI: 1.07-4.54;p=0.033], 1 [95% CI: 1.0-1.01;分别p = 0.032)。结论:有争议的吸烟悖论现象似乎在南亚人群的STE-ACS后患者中展开。吸烟的矛盾保护作用主要是年轻、冠状动脉疾病负担和复杂性较低、糖尿病和高血压患病率较低以及发病时Killip III/IV率较低的混淆效应。因此,在多变量分析中,CVA/卒中史、术前LVEDP、多血管疾病和ER中的RBS是院内死亡率的独立预测因子,其保护作用不显著。
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
Pakistan Heart Journal
Pakistan Heart Journal CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS-
CiteScore
0.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
64
审稿时长
6 weeks
期刊最新文献
Food and Cardiovascular Disease: What to Eat and What Not to Eat A Retrospective Chart Review of the Head-Up Tilt Table Test at a Tertiary Care University Hospital Improving Quality Health Care Services by Implementing DMAIC Approach in Paediatric Cardiology Department of Public Hospital of Sindh, Pakistan: A Case Study Association of Body Mass Index with Peripheral Vascular Resistance Obesity from Clinical Evaluation to Management Local Perspective
×
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