| 1. |
- Hofmann, Robin, et al.
(författare)
-
Oxygen therapy in suspected acute myocardial infarction
- 2017
-
Ingår i: New England Journal of Medicine. - : MASSACHUSETTS MEDICAL SOC. - 0028-4793 .- 1533-4406. ; 377:13, s. 1240-1249
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BACKGROUND: The clinical effect of routine oxygen therapy in patients with suspected acute myocardial infarction who do not have hypoxemia at baseline is uncertain. METHODS: In this registry-based randomized clinical trial, we used nationwide Swedish registries for patient enrollment and data collection. Patients with suspected myocardial infarction and an oxygen saturation of 90% or higher were randomly assigned to receive either supplemental oxygen (6 liters per minute for 6 to 12 hours, delivered through an open face mask) or ambient air. RESULTS: A total of 6629 patients were enrolled. The median duration of oxygen therapy was 11.6 hours, and the median oxygen saturation at the end of the treatment period was 99% among patients assigned to oxygen and 97% among patients assigned to ambient air. Hypoxemia developed in 62 patients (1.9%) in the oxygen group, as compared with 254 patients (7.7%) in the ambient-air group. The median of the highest troponin level during hospitalization was 946.5 ng per liter in the oxygen group and 983.0 ng per liter in the ambient-air group. The primary end point of death from any cause within 1 year after randomization occurred in 5.0% of patients (166 of 3311) assigned to oxygen and in 5.1% of patients (168 of 3318) assigned to ambient air (hazard ratio, 0.97; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.79 to 1.21; P=0.80). Rehospitalization with myocardial infarction within 1 year occurred in 126 patients (3.8%) assigned to oxygen and in 111 patients (3.3%) assigned to ambient air (hazard ratio, 1.13; 95% CI, 0.88 to 1.46; P=0.33). The results were consistent across all predefined subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: Routine use of supplemental oxygen in patients with suspected myocardial infarction who did not have hypoxemia was not found to reduce 1-year all-cause mortality. (Funded by the Swedish Heart–Lung Foundation and others; DETO2X-AMI ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01787110.)
|
|
| 2. |
- Yndigegn, T., et al.
(författare)
-
Beta-Blockers after Myocardial Infarction and Preserved Ejection Fraction
- 2024
-
Ingår i: New England Journal of Medicine. - : MASSACHUSETTS MEDICAL SOC. - 0028-4793 .- 1533-4406.
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background Most trials that have shown a benefit of beta-blocker treatment after myocardial infarction included patients with large myocardial infarctions and were conducted in an era before modern biomarker-based diagnosis of myocardial infarction and treatment with percutaneous coronary intervention, antithrombotic agents, high-intensity statins, and renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system antagonists.Methods In a parallel-group, open-label trial performed at 45 centers in Sweden, Estonia, and New Zealand, we randomly assigned patients with an acute myocardial infarction who had undergone coronary angiography and had a left ventricular ejection fraction of at least 50% to receive either long-term treatment with a beta-blocker (metoprolol or bisoprolol) or no beta-blocker treatment. The primary end point was a composite of death from any cause or new myocardial infarction.Results From September 2017 through May 2023, a total of 5020 patients were enrolled (95.4% of whom were from Sweden). The median follow-up was 3.5 years (interquartile range, 2.2 to 4.7). A primary end-point event occurred in 199 of 2508 patients (7.9%) in the beta-blocker group and in 208 of 2512 patients (8.3%) in the no-beta-blocker group (hazard ratio, 0.96; 95% confidence interval, 0.79 to 1.16; P=0.64). Beta-blocker treatment did not appear to lead to a lower cumulative incidence of the secondary end points (death from any cause, 3.9% in the beta-blocker group and 4.1% in the no-beta-blocker group; death from cardiovascular causes, 1.5% and 1.3%, respectively; myocardial infarction, 4.5% and 4.7%; hospitalization for atrial fibrillation, 1.1% and 1.4%; and hospitalization for heart failure, 0.8% and 0.9%). With regard to safety end points, hospitalization for bradycardia, second- or third-degree atrioventricular block, hypotension, syncope, or implantation of a pacemaker occurred in 3.4% of the patients in the beta-blocker group and in 3.2% of those in the no-beta-blocker group; hospitalization for asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in 0.6% and 0.6%, respectively; and hospitalization for stroke in 1.4% and 1.8%.Conclusions Among patients with acute myocardial infarction who underwent early coronary angiography and had a preserved left ventricular ejection fraction (>= 50%), long-term beta-blocker treatment did not lead to a lower risk of the composite primary end point of death from any cause or new myocardial infarction than no beta-blocker use. (Funded by the Swedish Research Council and others; REDUCE-AMI ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03278509.) Hospitalized patients with acute myocardial infarction and preserved EF were assigned to receive open-label long-term beta-blocker therapy or not. Beta-blockers did not lead to a lower risk of death or MI.
|
|
