European Heart Journal: Acute Cardiovascular Care最新文献

Aims: We validated the CREST model, a 5 variable score for stratifying the risk of circulatory aetiology death (CED) following out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) and compared its discrimination with the SCAI shock classification. Circulatory aetiology death occurs in approximately a third of patients admitted after resuscitated OHCA. There is an urgent need for improved stratification of the patient with OHCA on arrival to a cardiac arrest centre to improve patient selection for invasive interventions.

Methods and results: The CREST model and SCAI shock classification were applied to a dual-centre registry of 723 patients with cardiac aetiology OHCA, both with and without ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), between May 2012 and December 2020. The primary endpoint was a 30-day CED. Of 509 patients included (62.3 years, 75.4% male), 125 patients had CREST = 0 (24.5%), 162 had CREST = 1 (31.8%), 140 had CREST = 2 (27.5%), 75 had CREST = 3 (14.7%), 7 had a CREST of 4 (1.4%), and no patients had CREST = 5. Circulatory aetiology death was observed in 91 (17.9%) patients at 30 days [STEMI: 51/289 (17.6%); non-STEMI (NSTEMI): 40/220 (18.2%)]. For the total population, and both NSTEMI and STEMI subpopulations, an increasing CREST score was associated with increasing CED (all P < 0.001). The CREST score and SCAI classification had similar discrimination for the total population [area under the receiver operating curve (AUC) = 0.72/calibration slope = 0.95], NSTEMI cohort (AUC = 0.75/calibration slope = 0.940), and STEMI cohort (AUC = 0.69 and calibration slope = 0.925). Area under the receiver operating curve meta-analyses demonstrated no significant differences between the two classifications.

Conclusion: The CREST model and SCAI shock classification show similar prediction results for the development of CED after OHCA.

Aims: In patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), prehospital tirofiban significantly improved myocardial reperfusion. However, its impact on the rate of disrupted myocardial infarction (MI), particularly in the context of high-sensitivity cardiac troponin (hs-cTn) assays, is still unclear.

Methods and results: The On-TIME 2 (Ongoing Tirofiban In Myocardial infarction Evaluation 2) trial randomly assigned STEMI patients to prehospital tirofiban or placebo before transportation to a percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) centre. In this post hoc analysis, we evaluated STEMI patients that underwent primary PCI and had measured hs-cTn levels. Troponin T levels were collected at 18-24 and 72-96 h after PCI. Disrupted MI was defined as peak hs-cTn T levels ≤ 10 times the upper limit of normal (≤140 ng/L). Out of 786 STEMI patients, 47 (6%) had a disrupted MI. Disrupted MI occurred in 31 of 386 patients (8.0%) in the tirofiban arm and in 16 of 400 patients (4.0%) in the placebo arm (P = 0.026). After multivariate adjustment, prehospital tirofiban remained independently associated with disrupted MI (odds ratio 2.03; 95% confidence interval 1.10-3.87; P = 0.027). None of the patients with disrupted MI died during the 1-year follow-up, compared with a mortality rate of 2.6% among those without disrupted MI.

Conclusion: Among STEMI patients undergoing primary PCI, the use of prehospital tirofiban was independently associated with a higher rate of disrupted MI. These results, highlighting a potential benefit, underscore the need for future research focusing on innovative pre-treatment approaches that may increase the rate of disrupted MI.

Aims: The optimal vascular access site for percutaneous coronary interventions (PCIs) in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) complicated by cardiogenic shock (CS) remains uncertain. While observational data favour transradial access (TRA) due to lower complication rates and mortality, transfemoral access (TFA) PCI offers advantages such as shorter access and procedure times, along with quicker escalation to mechanical circulatory support (MCS). In this study, we aimed to investigate factors associated with a transfemoral approach and compare mortality rates between TRA and TFA in AMI-CS patients undergoing PCI.

Methods and results: Data from a nationwide registry of AMI-CS patients undergoing PCI (2017-2021) were analysed. We compared patient demographics, procedural details, and outcomes between TRA and TFA groups. Logistic regression identified access site factors and radial-to-femoral crossover predictors. Propensity score-matched (PSM) analysis examined the impact of access site on mortality. Of the 1562 patients, 45% underwent TRA PCI, with an increasing trend over time. Transfemoral access patients were more often female, had a history of coronary artery bypass grafting, lower blood pressure, higher resuscitation and intubation rates, and elevated lactate levels. After PSM, 30-day mortality was lower in TRA (33% vs. 46%, P < 0.001). Predictors for crossover included left coronary artery interventions, multivessel PCI, and MCS initiation.

Conclusion: Significant differences exist between TRA and TFA PCI in AMI-CS. Transfemoral access was more common in patients with worse haemodynamics and was associated with higher 30-day mortality compared with TRA. This mortality difference persisted in the PSM analysis.