European Heart Journal: Acute Cardiovascular Care最新文献

Aims: Cardiac troponin plays an essential role in the management of non-ST segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS). However, it is not clear whether troponin concentrations provide guidance regarding the initiation of prognostically beneficial cardiovascular medications [i.e. betablockers, renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) inhibitors, and statins] in NSTE-ACS.

Methods and results: Registry-based study investigating three NSTE-ACS cohorts (n = 43 075, 40 162, and 46 698) with elevated high-sensitivity cardiac troponin concentrations >14 ng/L. Cox proportional regression models with the addition of interaction terms were used to analyse the interrelations of high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T (hs-cTnT) concentrations, new initiated medications with the respective three drug classes, and long-term risk of all-cause mortality and major adverse events (MAE). Betablockers were associated with risk reductions of 8 and 5% regarding all-cause mortality and MAE, respectively. There was no evidence of an interaction with hs-cTnT concentrations. RAAS inhibitors were associated with 13 and 8% risk reductions, respectively, with a weak interaction between hs-cTnT and MAE (Pinteraction = 0.016). However, no increasing prognostic benefit was noted at hs-cTnT concentrations >100 ng/L. Statins were associated with 38 and 32% risk reductions, respectively, with prognostic benefit across the entire range of hs-cTnT concentrations, and with a weak interaction regarding MAE (Pinteraction = 0.011).

Conclusion: Cardiovascular medications provide different prognostic benefit in patients with NSTE-ACS with elevated hs-cTnT, and there was some evidence of greater treatment effects regarding MAE along with higher hs-cTnT concentrations. However, hs-cTnT appears only to have limited value overall for customizing such treatments.

Aims: Renal and liver congestion are associated with adverse outcomes in patients with tricuspid regurgitation (TR). Currently, there are no valid sonographic indicators of fluid status in this population. Intra-renal venous Doppler (IRVD) is a novel method for quantifying renal congestion but its interpretation can be challenging in severe TR due to altered haemodynamics. This study explores the potential of portal vein Doppler (PVD) as an alternative marker for decongestion during volume removal in patients with severe TR.

Methods and results: Forty-two patients with severe TR undergoing decongestive therapy were prospectively enrolled. Inferior vena cava diameter, PVD, and IRVD were sequentially assessed during volume removal. Improvement criteria were portal vein pulsatility fraction (PVPF) < 70% and renal venous stasis index (RVSI) < 0.5 for partial improvement, and PVPF < 30% and RVSI < 0.2 for complete improvement. After volume removal, PVPF significantly improved from 130 ± 39% to 47 ± 44% (P < 0.001), while IRVD improved from 0.72 ± 0.08 to 0.54 ± 0.22 (P < 0.001). A higher proportion of patients displayed improvement in PVD compared to IRVD (partial: 38% vs. 29%, complete: 41% vs. 7%) (P < 0.001). Intra-renal venous Doppler only improved in patients with concomitant improvement in severe TR. Portal vein Doppler was the only predictor of achieving ≥5 L of negative fluid balance [area under the ROC curve (AUC) 0.83 P = 0.001].

Conclusion: This proof-of-concept study suggests that PVD is the only sonographic marker that can track volume removal in severe TR, offering a potential indicator for decongestion in this population. Further intervention trials are warranted to determine if PVD-guided decongestion improves patient outcomes in severe TR.

Aims: The prospective GULLIVE-R study aimed to evaluate adherence to guideline-recommended secondary prevention, physicians' and patients' estimation of cardiac risk, and patients' knowledge about target values of risk factors after acute myocardial infarction (AMI).

Methods and results: We performed a prospective study enrolling patients 9-12 months after AMI. Guideline-recommended secondary prevention therapies and physicians as well as patients' estimation about their risk and patients' knowledge about target values were prospectively collected. Between July 2019 and June 2021, a total of 2509 outpatients were enrolled in 150 German centres 10 months after AMI. The mean age was 66 years, 26.4% were women, 45.3% had ST elevation myocardial infarction, 54.7% had non-ST elevation myocardial infarction, and 93.6% had revascularization (84.0% percutaneous coronary intervention, 7.4% coronary artery bypass graft, 1.8% both). Guideline-recommended secondary drug therapies were prescribed in over 80% of patients, while only about 50% received all five recommended drugs (aspirin, P2Y12 inhibitors, statins, beta-blockers, renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors), and regular exercise was performed by only one-third. About 90% of patients felt well informed about secondary prevention, but the correct target value for blood pressure was known in only 37.9% and for LDL-cholesterol in only 8.2%. Both physicians and patients underestimated the objective risk of future AMIs as determined by the thormbolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI) risk score for secondary prevention.

Conclusion: There is still room for improvement in patient education and implementation of guideline-recommended non-pharmacological and pharmacological secondary prevention therapies in patients in the chronic phase after AMI.

Aims: The Killip scale remains a fundamental tool for prognostic assessment in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) due to its simplicity and predictive value. Lung ultrasound (LUS) has emerged as a valuable adjunct for diagnosing and predicting outcomes in heart failure (HF) and STEMI patients, even those with subclinical congestion. We created a new classification (Killip pLUS), which reclassifies Killip I and II patients into an intermediate category (Killip I pLUS) based on LUS results. This category included Killip I patients and ≥1 positive zone (≥3 B-lines) and Killip II with 0 positive zones. We aimed to evaluate this new classification by comparing it with the Killip scale and a previous LUS-based reclassification scale (LUCK scale).

Methods and results: Lung ultrasound was performed within 24 h of admission in a multicentre cohort of 373 patients admitted for STEMI. In-hospital mortality and major adverse cardiovascular events within one year after admission, comprising mortality or readmission for HF, acute coronary syndrome, or stroke, were analysed. When predicting in-hospital mortality, the global comparison of these three classifications was statistically significant: Killip pLUS area under the curve (AUC) 0.90 (95% CI 0.85-0.95) vs. Killip AUC 0.85 (95% CI 0.73-0.96) vs. LUCK 0.83 (95% CI 0.70-0.95), P = 0.024. To predict events during follow-up, the comparison between scales was also significant: Killip pLUS 0.77 (95% CI 0.71-0.85) vs. Killip 0.72 (95% CI 0.65-0.79) vs. LUCK 0.73 (95% CI 0.66-0.81), P = 0.033.

Conclusion: The Killip pLUS scale provides enhanced risk stratification compared to the Killip and LUCK scales while preserving simplicity.