Search

BACKGROUND:Acute myocardial infarction (AMI) complicates the clinical management of atrial fibrillation (AF) because coronary stenting may influence subsequent antithrombotic therapy. We investigated the use of a bare-metal stent (BMS) or a drug-eluting stent (DES) and associated outcomes in patients with pre-existing AF and first AMI undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. METHODS AND RESULTS:Patient records in this population-based study were retrospectively collected from the Taiwan National Health Insurance Research Database. Using propensity score matching (PSM), we used 1:2 ratio stratification into a DES group of 436 and a BMS group of 785 patients from 2007 to 2011. The mean follow-up of matched cohorts was 1.7 years. After PSM, DESs were associated with lower rates of cardiovascular death (7.8%, hazard ratio [HR] 0.58, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.39-0.86 and 10.1%, HR 0.64, 95% CI 0.45-0.90) and primary composite outcome (35.1%, HR 0.76, 95% CI 0.63-0.92 and 48.2%, HR 0.81, 95% CI 0.69-0.96) than BMSs within the first year and at the end of follow-up. Although the greatest benefit from DESs, irrespective of the first- and second- generation DESs, implantation was observed within the first year only, this benefit was not observed in patients with diabetes, chronic kidney disease, or dialysis. CONCLUSIONS:Use of DESs in AMI patients with pre-existing AF is associated with significantly lower rates of cardiovascular death and primary composite outcome within the first year follow-up. However, the effect is not apparent in patients with diabetes, chronic kidney disease or dialysis.

ObjectiveWhether the cardiovascular (CV) outcomes of second-generation limus-eluting stents (LESs) differ from those of paclitaxel-eluting stents (PESs) in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) complicated by cardiogenic shock (CS) is still unclear.MethodsWe used the Taiwan National Health Insurance Research Database to analyse data of 516 patients with AMI and CS diagnosed from January 2007 to December 2011. We used propensity score matching to adjust for the imbalance in covariate baseline values between these two groups. We evaluated clinical outcomes by comparing 197 subjects who used second-generation LESs to 319 matched subjects who used PESs.ResultsThe risk of the primary composite outcomes (i.e., myocardial infarction, coronary revascularisation or CV death) was significantly lower in the second-generation LES group than in the PES group [37.3% vs. 51.8%; hazard ratio (HR), 0.73; 95% CI: 0.56-0.95] at the 12-month follow-up. The patients who received second-generation LESs had a lower risk of coronary revascularisation (HR 0.62; 95% CI: 0.41-0.93) than those who used PESs. However, the risks of myocardial infarction (HR 0.56; 95% CI: 0.26-1.24), ischemic stroke (HR 0.73; 95% CI: 0.23-2.35), or CV death (HR 0.90; 95% CI: 0.63-1.28) were not significantly different between the two groups.ConclusionsAmong patients with CS-complicating AMI, second-generation LES implantation significantly reduced the risk of coronary revascularisation and composite CV events compared to PES implantation at the 12-month follow-up.

Prior studies have suggested intraaortic balloon pump (IABP) have a neutral effect on acute myocardial infarction (AMI) patients with cardiogenic shock (CS). However, the effects of IABP on patients with severe CS remain unclear. We therefore investigated the benefits of IABP in AMI patients with severe CS undergoing coronary revascularization.This study identified 14,088 adult patients with AMI and severe CS undergoing coronary revascularization from Taiwan's National Health Insurance Research Database between January 1, 1997 and December 31, 2011, dividing them into the IABP group (n = 7044) and the Nonusers group (n = 7044) after propensity score matching to equalize confounding variables. The primary outcomes included myocardial infarction(MI), cerebrovascular accidents or cardiovascular death. In-hospital events including dialysis, stroke, pneumonia and sepsis were secondary outcomes. Primary outcomes were worse in the IABP group than in the Nonusers group in 1 month (Hazard ratio (HR) = 1.97, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.84-2.12). The MI rate was higher in the IABP group (HR = 1.44, 95% CI = 1.16-1.79), and the cardiovascular death was much higher in the IABP group (HR = 2.07, 95% CI = 1.92-2.23). The IABP users had lower incidence of dialysis (8.5% and 9.5%, P = 0.04), stroke (2.6% and 3.8%, P

OBJECTIVE: Little is known about long-term outcomes among patients who receive percutaneous angioplasty (PTA) for peripheral artery disease (PAD) then undergo below-knee or above-knee amputations. We sought to determine clinical outcomes associated with below-knee or above-knee amputation, along with possible explanatory factors and treatment strategies. METHODS: Using data from Taiwan's National Health Insurance Research Database from 1997 to 2010, 7,568 adult patients were divided into three groups: lower extremity preserved (LE), below-knee amputation (BK) and above-knee amputation (AK). We assessed outcomes including major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) and associated risk factors. RESULTS: Overall MACE was significantly higher in the AK group compared to the LE and BK groups, over a mean follow-up of 2.45 years (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.81; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.50-2.18 for AK vs. LE; HR: 1.67; 95% CI: 1.36-2.06 for AK vs. BK). However MACE were similar for the BK and LE groups (HR: 1.08; 95% CI: 0.98-1.20). Overall mortality was highest in the AK group (HR: 1.65, 95% CI: 1.34-2.04 for AK vs. BK). As for patient characteristics, atrial fibrillation was more prevalent in the AK group than in the BK group (17% vs. 7%). Independent risk factors associated with death after above- or below-knee amputation included advanced age, heart failure, dialysis, male gender and high patient volume. CONCLUSION: The MACE rate was highest in the AK group, whereas the LE and BK groups were similar in this regard. Furthermore, overall mortality increased with larger area of amputation.

BACKGROUND: While hypertension is negatively associated with coronary artery spasm (CAS), scarce data are available on diabetes mellitus in relation to CAS. In addition, outcome prediction in patients with CAS is challenging due to the lack of appropriate biomarkers. Therefore, we sought to identify the roles that gender, high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP), diabetes mellitus and hypertension play in CAS development and prognosis. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Patients (350 women and 547 men) undergoing diagnostic coronary angiography with or without proven CAS but without obstructive stenosis were evaluated at long-term follow-up (median 102 months). Diabetic women and diabetic men with low hs-CRP levels had a low and high risk of CAS (odds ratio [OR]: 0.16, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.01-1.88 and OR: 5.02, 95% CI: 1.03-24.54, respectively). The ORs of CAS in both women and men with the highest hs-CRP tertile (>3 mg/L) reduced from 4.41 to 1.45 and 2.98 to 1.52, respectively, if they had diabetes mellitus, and from 9.68 to 2.43 and 2.60 to 1.75, respectively, if they had hypertension. Hypertension had a more negative effect on CAS development in diabetic than non-diabetic women, which was not observed in men. The highest hs-CRP tertile was an independent predictor of adverse outcomes. Patients with the highest hs-CRP tertile had more coronary events than patients with the lowest hs-CRP tertitle (p = 0.021, log-rank test). CONCLUSIONS: Diabetes mellitus contributes to CAS development in men with low hs-CRP levels, but not in women. There are negative effects of diabetes mellitus and hypertension on CAS development in patients with high hs-CRP levels and especially in women. Elevated hs-CRP level independently predicts adverse outcomes.