Mengjin Hu, Chuangshi Wang, Jingang Yang, Xiaojin Gao, Yuejin Yang, The China Acute Myocardial Infarction Registry Investigators
{"title":"在当代再灌注时代,重新评估 STEMI 患者出院时接受 ACEI/ARB 治疗的效果。","authors":"Mengjin Hu, Chuangshi Wang, Jingang Yang, Xiaojin Gao, Yuejin Yang, The China Acute Myocardial Infarction Registry Investigators","doi":"10.33963/v.phj.102772","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEI) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB) had beneficial effects on clinical outcomes in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) in the pre-reperfusion or thrombolytic era. It is unknown if the benefits persist in the contemporary reperfusion era.</p><p><strong>Aims: </strong>We sought to determine if ACEI/ARB improve clinical outcomes for STEMI patients in the contemporary reperfusion era according to the reperfusion strategy.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In total, we analyzed 12 596 patients from the prospective, nationwide, multicenter China Acute Myocardial Infarction Registry. These patients were classified into the no-reperfusion group (n = 6004) and the primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) group (n = 6592). Two-year all-cause mortality and major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) were compared.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In the no-reperfusion group, ACEI/ARB therapy on discharge may reduce the incidence of 30-day MACCE (4.7% vs. 7.4%; adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 0.67; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.53-0.85; P <0.001), stroke (0.5% vs. 1.1%; adjusted HR, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.21-0.83; P = 0.01), and revascularization (2.1% vs. 3.1%; adjusted HR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.46-0.94; P = 0.02), compared to patients not treated with ACEI/ARB. Patients treated with ACEI/ARB also showed a lower rate of 2-year MACCE (17.0% vs. 19.1%; adjusted HR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.76-0.99; P = 0.04). No differences were observed in the remaining outcomes. In the primary PCI group, no differences were observed for all examined outcomes before and after multivariate adjustments.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Initiating ACEI/ARB treatment on discharge may reduce cardiovascular events in STEMI patients not receiving reperfusion, while no significant benefits were observed in those receiving primary PCI.</p>","PeriodicalId":17784,"journal":{"name":"Kardiologia polska","volume":" ","pages":"1099-1108"},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Reevaluating the effect of ACEI/ARB therapy on discharged patients with STEMI in the contemporary reperfusion era.\",\"authors\":\"Mengjin Hu, Chuangshi Wang, Jingang Yang, Xiaojin Gao, Yuejin Yang, The China Acute Myocardial Infarction Registry Investigators\",\"doi\":\"10.33963/v.phj.102772\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEI) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB) had beneficial effects on clinical outcomes in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) in the pre-reperfusion or thrombolytic era. It is unknown if the benefits persist in the contemporary reperfusion era.</p><p><strong>Aims: </strong>We sought to determine if ACEI/ARB improve clinical outcomes for STEMI patients in the contemporary reperfusion era according to the reperfusion strategy.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In total, we analyzed 12 596 patients from the prospective, nationwide, multicenter China Acute Myocardial Infarction Registry. These patients were classified into the no-reperfusion group (n = 6004) and the primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) group (n = 6592). Two-year all-cause mortality and major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) were compared.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In the no-reperfusion group, ACEI/ARB therapy on discharge may reduce the incidence of 30-day MACCE (4.7% vs. 7.4%; adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 0.67; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.53-0.85; P <0.001), stroke (0.5% vs. 1.1%; adjusted HR, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.21-0.83; P = 0.01), and revascularization (2.1% vs. 3.1%; adjusted HR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.46-0.94; P = 0.02), compared to patients not treated with ACEI/ARB. Patients treated with ACEI/ARB also showed a lower rate of 2-year MACCE (17.0% vs. 19.1%; adjusted HR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.76-0.99; P = 0.04). No differences were observed in the remaining outcomes. In the primary PCI group, no differences were observed for all examined outcomes before and after multivariate adjustments.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Initiating ACEI/ARB treatment on discharge may reduce cardiovascular events in STEMI patients not receiving reperfusion, while no significant benefits were observed in those receiving primary PCI.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":17784,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Kardiologia polska\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1099-1108\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Kardiologia polska\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.33963/v.phj.102772\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/10/8 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Kardiologia polska","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.33963/v.phj.102772","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/10/8 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Reevaluating the effect of ACEI/ARB therapy on discharged patients with STEMI in the contemporary reperfusion era.
Background: Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEI) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB) had beneficial effects on clinical outcomes in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) in the pre-reperfusion or thrombolytic era. It is unknown if the benefits persist in the contemporary reperfusion era.
Aims: We sought to determine if ACEI/ARB improve clinical outcomes for STEMI patients in the contemporary reperfusion era according to the reperfusion strategy.
Methods: In total, we analyzed 12 596 patients from the prospective, nationwide, multicenter China Acute Myocardial Infarction Registry. These patients were classified into the no-reperfusion group (n = 6004) and the primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) group (n = 6592). Two-year all-cause mortality and major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) were compared.
Results: In the no-reperfusion group, ACEI/ARB therapy on discharge may reduce the incidence of 30-day MACCE (4.7% vs. 7.4%; adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 0.67; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.53-0.85; P <0.001), stroke (0.5% vs. 1.1%; adjusted HR, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.21-0.83; P = 0.01), and revascularization (2.1% vs. 3.1%; adjusted HR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.46-0.94; P = 0.02), compared to patients not treated with ACEI/ARB. Patients treated with ACEI/ARB also showed a lower rate of 2-year MACCE (17.0% vs. 19.1%; adjusted HR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.76-0.99; P = 0.04). No differences were observed in the remaining outcomes. In the primary PCI group, no differences were observed for all examined outcomes before and after multivariate adjustments.
Conclusions: Initiating ACEI/ARB treatment on discharge may reduce cardiovascular events in STEMI patients not receiving reperfusion, while no significant benefits were observed in those receiving primary PCI.
期刊介绍:
Kardiologia Polska (Kardiol Pol, Polish Heart Journal) is the official peer-reviewed journal of the Polish Cardiac Society (PTK, Polskie Towarzystwo Kardiologiczne) published monthly since 1957. It aims to provide a platform for sharing knowledge in cardiology, from basic science to translational and clinical research on cardiovascular diseases.