Refine
Document Type
- Article (2)
Language
- English (2)
Has Fulltext
- yes (2)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (2)
Keywords
- Anemia (1)
- Atrial fibrillation (1)
- Chest pain unit (1)
- Coronary intervention (1)
- Left atrial appendage closure (1)
- NSTEMI (1)
- Outcomes (1)
- Prognosis (1)
Institute
- Medizin (2)
Invasive treatment of NSTEMI patients in German chest pain units – evidence for a treatment paradox
(2018)
Background: Patients with non ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) represent the largest fraction of patients with acute coronary syndrome in German Chest Pain units. Recent evidence on early vs. selective percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is ambiguous with respect to effects on mortality, myocardial infarction (MI) and recurrent angina. With the present study we sought to investigate the prognostic impact of PCI and its timing in German Chest Pain Unit (CPU) NSTEMI patients.
Methods and results: Data from 1549 patients whose leading diagnosis was NSTEMI were retrieved from the German CPU registry for the interval between 3/2010 and 3/2014. Follow-up was available at median of 167 days after discharge. The patients were grouped into a higher (Group A) and lower risk group (Group B) according to GRACE score and additional criteria on admission. Group A had higher Killip classes, higher BNP levels, reduced EF and significant more triple vessel disease (p < 0.001). Surprisingly, patients in group A less frequently received early diagnostic catheterization and PCI. While conservative management did not affect prognosis in Group B, higher-risk CPU-NSTEMI patients without PCI had a significantly worse survival.
Conclusions: The present results reveal a substantial treatment gap in higher-risk NSTEMI patients in German Chest Pain Units. This treatment paradox may worsen prognosis in patients who could derive the largest benefit from early revascularization.
Introduction: Patients undergoing left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) are often severly anemic and close to the transfusion threshold. The aim was to investigate the prevalence of severe anemia in this cohort and if procedural safety is compromised compared with non-anemic patients.
Methods and results: Comparison of severly anemic patients (Hb < 80 g/l) vs. non-severly anemic patients in the prospective, multicentre observational LAARGE registry of patients undergoing LAAC. A total of 638 patients (anemia 22.3% vs non-anemic 77.7%) were included. Anemic patients were older (77.1 years ± 7.9 vs 75.6 years ± 7.9, p = 0.014), had more comorbidities, higher CHA2DS2-VASc (4.8 vs 4.4, p = 0.017) and higher HAS-BLED (4.3 vs 3.8, p < 0.001) scores. Implant success was not influenced by anemia (99.3% vs 97.2%). Severe in-hospital (0.7% vs 5.6%, p = 0.01) and overall complications (8.5% vs 13.7%, p = 0.11) were less common in patients with anemia, driven by fewer pericardial effusions. Mortality was higher in anemic patients and associated with an increased hazard ratio, albeit not significantly (16.0% vs 10.3%, HR 1.61 (95%-CI: 0.97–2.67), p = 0.06). In the one-year follow-up, composite outcome of death, stroke or systemic embolism occurred in 22/142 anemic and in 54/496 non-anemic patients with an adjusted HR of 1.04 (95%-CI 0.62–1.73, p = 0.89).
Conclusion: Severe anemia close to the transfusion threshold is common in patients undergoing LAAC. However, this does not influence in-hospital complications or implant success. One-year mortality is higher in anemic patients, mainly driven by co-morbidities.