One-Year Prognostic Differences and Management Strategies between ST-Elevation and Non-ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction: Insights from the PRAISE Registry.
Luigi Spadafora, Paola Pastena, Stefano Cacciatore, Matteo Betti, Giuseppe Biondi-Zoccai, Fabrizio D'Ascenzo, Gaetano Maria De Ferrari, Ovidio De Filippo, Francesco Versaci, Sebastiano Sciarretta, Giacomo Frati, Francesco Fiorentino, Marco Borgi, Nicola Pierucci, Pierre Sabouret, Francesco Ajmone, Attilio Lauretti, Federico Russo, Alberto Polimeni, Maciej Banach, Giorgia Panichella, Marco Bernardi
{"title":"One-Year Prognostic Differences and Management Strategies between ST-Elevation and Non-ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction: Insights from the PRAISE Registry.","authors":"Luigi Spadafora, Paola Pastena, Stefano Cacciatore, Matteo Betti, Giuseppe Biondi-Zoccai, Fabrizio D'Ascenzo, Gaetano Maria De Ferrari, Ovidio De Filippo, Francesco Versaci, Sebastiano Sciarretta, Giacomo Frati, Francesco Fiorentino, Marco Borgi, Nicola Pierucci, Pierre Sabouret, Francesco Ajmone, Attilio Lauretti, Federico Russo, Alberto Polimeni, Maciej Banach, Giorgia Panichella, Marco Bernardi","doi":"10.1007/s40256-025-00739-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Whether ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) carry distinct prognoses after discharge remains a matter of debate. This study aimed to compare 1-year clinical outcomes between patients with STEMI and NSTEMI in a large, real-world cohort.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Among 23,270 patients with acute coronary syndrome enrolled in the international PRAISE registry between 2003 and 2019, we included 21,789 patients with a diagnosis of either STEMI or NSTEMI. Clinical characteristics, discharge medications, and outcomes at 1 year were analyzed. The primary outcomes were all-cause mortality, re-infarction, and major bleeding. Multivariable logistic regression and propensity score matching were used to adjust for confounding. Subgroup and interaction analyses were also performed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The cohort included 12,365 patients with STEMI and 9424 patients with NSTEMI. At baseline, patients with NSTEMI had more comorbidities, cardiovascular risk factors (except diabetes), and prior revascularization. Patients with STEMI were more frequently treated with statins, beta-blockers, and renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors at discharge. At 1-year follow-up, overall outcomes were comparable between groups. Nonfatal reinfarction occurred more frequently in patients with NSTEMI (3.4% versus 2.8%, p = 0.022), but this association was not significant after adjustment (odds ratio [OR] 0.90, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.65-1.24, p = 0.519). Results from propensity score-matched analyses confirmed the absence of prognostic differences. Subgroup analyses revealed significant interactions for diabetes mellitus and completeness of revascularization.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>After accounting for clinical and therapeutic variables, 1-year outcomes were largely similar in patients with STEMI and NSTEMI. Differences in reinfarction risk appear to be driven by baseline characteristics and treatment patterns, rather than infarct type itself.</p>","PeriodicalId":7652,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Cardiovascular Drugs","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Journal of Cardiovascular Drugs","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40256-025-00739-8","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Introduction: Whether ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) carry distinct prognoses after discharge remains a matter of debate. This study aimed to compare 1-year clinical outcomes between patients with STEMI and NSTEMI in a large, real-world cohort.
Methods: Among 23,270 patients with acute coronary syndrome enrolled in the international PRAISE registry between 2003 and 2019, we included 21,789 patients with a diagnosis of either STEMI or NSTEMI. Clinical characteristics, discharge medications, and outcomes at 1 year were analyzed. The primary outcomes were all-cause mortality, re-infarction, and major bleeding. Multivariable logistic regression and propensity score matching were used to adjust for confounding. Subgroup and interaction analyses were also performed.
Results: The cohort included 12,365 patients with STEMI and 9424 patients with NSTEMI. At baseline, patients with NSTEMI had more comorbidities, cardiovascular risk factors (except diabetes), and prior revascularization. Patients with STEMI were more frequently treated with statins, beta-blockers, and renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors at discharge. At 1-year follow-up, overall outcomes were comparable between groups. Nonfatal reinfarction occurred more frequently in patients with NSTEMI (3.4% versus 2.8%, p = 0.022), but this association was not significant after adjustment (odds ratio [OR] 0.90, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.65-1.24, p = 0.519). Results from propensity score-matched analyses confirmed the absence of prognostic differences. Subgroup analyses revealed significant interactions for diabetes mellitus and completeness of revascularization.
Conclusions: After accounting for clinical and therapeutic variables, 1-year outcomes were largely similar in patients with STEMI and NSTEMI. Differences in reinfarction risk appear to be driven by baseline characteristics and treatment patterns, rather than infarct type itself.
期刊介绍：
Promoting rational therapy within the discipline of cardiology, the American Journal of Cardiovascular Drugs covers all aspects of the treatment of cardiovascular disorders, particularly the place in therapy of newer and established agents.
Via a program of reviews and original clinical research articles, the journal addresses major issues relating to treatment of these disorders, including the pharmacology, efficacy and adverse effects of the major classes of drugs; information on newly developed drugs and drug classes; the therapeutic implications of latest research into the aetiology of cardiovascular disorders; and the practical management of specific clinical situations.
The American Journal of Cardiovascular Drugs offers a range of additional enhanced features designed to increase the visibility, readership and educational value of the journal’s content. Each article is accompanied by a Key Points summary, giving a time-efficient overview of the content to a wide readership. Articles may be accompanied by plain language summaries to assist patients, caregivers and others in understanding important medical advances. The journal also provides the option to include various other types of enhanced features including slide sets, videos and animations. All enhanced features are peer reviewed to the same high standard as the article itself. Peer review is conducted using Editorial Manager®, supported by a database of international experts. This database is shared with other Adis journals.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
