| 1. |
- Alabas, Oras A., et al.
(författare)
-
Sex Differences in Treatments, Relative Survival, and Excess Mortality Following Acute Myocardial Infarction : National Cohort Study Using the SWEDEHEART Registry
- 2017
-
Ingår i: Journal of the American Heart Association. - : WILEY. - 2047-9980 .- 2047-9980. ; 6:12
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background - This study assessed sex differences in treatments, all-cause mortality, relative survival, and excess mortality following acute myocardial infarction.Methods and Results - A population-based cohort of all hospitals providing acute myocardial infarction care in Sweden (SWEDEHEART [Swedish Web System for Enhancement and Development of Evidence-Based Care in Heart Disease Evaluated According to Recommended Therapies]) from 2003 to 2013 was included in the analysis. Excess mortality rate ratios (EMRRs), adjusted for clinical characteristics and guideline-indicated treatments after matching by age, sex, and year to background mortality data, were estimated. Although there were no sex differences in all-cause mortality adjusted for age, year of hospitalization, and comorbidities for ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and non-STEMI at 1 year (mortality rate ratio: 1.01 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.96-1.05] and 0.97 [95% CI, 0.95-.99], respectively) and 5 years (mortality rate ratio: 1.03 [95% CI, 0.99-1.07] and 0.97 [95% CI, 0.95-.99], respectively), excess mortality was higher among women compared with men for STEMI and non-STEMI at 1 year (EMRR: 1.89 [95% CI, 1.66-2.16] and 1.20 [95% CI, 1.16-1.24], respectively) and 5 years (EMRR: 1.60 [95% CI, 1.48-1.72] and 1.26 [95% CI, 1.21-1.32], respectively). After further adjustment for the use of guideline-indicated treatments, excess mortality among women with non-STEMI was not significant at 1 year (EMRR: 1.01 [95% CI, 0.97-1.04]) and slightly higher at 5 years (EMRR: 1.07 [95% CI, 1.02-1.12]). For STEMI, adjustment for treatments attenuated the excess mortality for women at 1 year (EMRR: 1.43 [95% CI, 1.26-1.62]) and 5 years (EMRR: 1.31 [95% CI, 1.19-1.43]).Conclusions - Women with acute myocardial infarction did not have statistically different all-cause mortality, but had higher excess mortality compared with men that was attenuated after adjustment for the use of guideline-indicated treatments. This suggests that improved adherence to guideline recommendations for the treatment of acute myocardial infarction may reduce premature cardiovascular death among women.
|
|
| 2. |
- Alabas, Oras A., et al.
(författare)
-
Statistics on mortality following acute myocardial infarction in 842 897 Europeans
- 2020
-
Ingår i: Cardiovascular Research. - : OXFORD UNIV PRESS. - 0008-6363 .- 1755-3245. ; 116:1, s. 149-157
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Aims: To compare ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and non-STEMI (NSTEMI) mortality between Sweden and the UK, adjusting for background population rates of expected death, case mix, and treatments.Methods and results: National data were collected from hospitals in Sweden [n = 73 hospitals, 180 368 patients, Swedish Web-system for Enhancement and Development of Evidence-based care in Heart disease Evaluated According to Recommended Therapies (SWEDEHEART)] and the UK [n = 247, 662 529 patients, Myocardial Ischaemia National Audit Project (MINAP)] between 2003 and 2013. There were lower rates of revascularization [STEMI (43.8% vs. 74.9%); NSTEMI (27.5% vs. 43.6%)] and pharmacotherapies at time of hospital discharge including [aspirin (82.9% vs. 90.2%) and (79.9% vs. 88.0%), beta-blockers (73.4% vs. 86.4%) and (65.3% vs. 85.1%)] in the UK compared with Sweden, respectively. Standardized net probability of death (NPD) between admission and 1 month was higher in the UK for STEMI [8.0 (95% confidence interval 7.4-8.5) vs. 6.7 (6.5-6.9)] and NSTEMI [6.8 (6.4-7.2) vs. 4.9 (4.7-5.0)]. Between 6 months and 1 year and more than 1 year, NPD remained higher in the UK for NSTEMI [2.9 (2.5-3.3) vs. 2.3 (2.2-2.5)] and [21.4 (20.0-22.8) vs. 18.3 (17.6-19.0)], but was similar for STEMI [0.7 (0.4-1.0) vs. 0.9 (0.7-1.0)] and [8.4 (6.7-10.1) vs. 8.3 (7.5-9.1)].Conclusion: Short-term mortality following STEMI and NSTEMI was higher in the UK compared with Sweden. Mid- and longer-term mortality remained higher in the UK for NSTEMI but was similar for STEMI. Differences in mortality may be due to differential use of guideline-indicated treatments.
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
- Dondo, Tatendashe B., et al.
(författare)
-
beta-Blockers and Mortality After Acute Myocardial Infarction in Patients Without Heart Failure or Ventricular Dysfunction
- 2017
-
Ingår i: Journal of the American College of Cardiology. - : ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC. - 0735-1097 .- 1558-3597. ; 69:22, s. 2710-2720
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BACKGROUND: For acute myocardial infarction (AMI) without heart failure (HF), it is unclear if beta-blockers are associated with reduced mortality.OBJECTIVES: The goal of this study was to determine the association between beta-blocker use and mortality in patients with AMI without HF or left ventricular systolic dysfunction (LVSD).METHODS: This cohort study used national English and Welsh registry data from the Myocardial Ischaemia National Audit Project. A total of 179,810 survivors of hospitalization with AMI without HF or LVSD, between January 1, 2007, and June 30, 2013 (final follow-up: December 31, 2013), were assessed. Survival-time inverse probability weighting propensity scores and instrumental variable analyses were used to investigate the association between the use of beta-blockers and 1-year mortality.RESULTS: Of 91,895 patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction and 87,915 patients with non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, 88,542 (96.4%) and 81,933 (93.2%) received beta-blockers, respectively. For the entire cohort, with> 163,772 person-years of observation, there were 9,373 deaths (5.2%). Unadjusted 1-year mortality was lower for patients who received beta-blockers compared with those who did not (4.9% vs. 11.2%; p < 0.001). However, after weighting and adjustment, there was no significant difference in mortality between those with and without beta-blocker use (average treatment effect [ATE] coefficient: 0.07; 95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.60 to 0.75; p = 0.827). Findings were similar for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (ATE coefficient: 0.30; 95% CI: -0.98 to 1.58; p = 0.637) and non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (ATE coefficient: -0.07; 95% CI: -0.68 to 0.54; p = 0.819).CONCLUSIONS: Among survivors of hospitalization with AMI who did not have HF or LVSD as recorded in the hospital, the use of beta-blockers was not associated with a lower risk of death at any time point up to 1 year.
|
|
| 5. |
- Faxén, Jonas, et al.
(författare)
-
A user-friendly risk-score for predicting in-hospital cardiac arrest among patients admitted with suspected non ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome - The SAFER-score
- 2017
-
Ingår i: Resuscitation. - : Elsevier BV. - 0300-9572 .- 1873-1570. ; 121, s. 41-48
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- AIM: To develop a simple risk-score model for predicting in-hospital cardiac arrest (CA) among patients hospitalized with suspected non-ST elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS).METHODS: Using the Swedish Web-system for Enhancement and Development of Evidence-based care in Heart disease Evaluated According to Recommended Therapies (SWEDEHEART), we identified patients (n=242 303) admitted with suspected NSTE-ACS between 2008 and 2014. Logistic regression was used to assess the association between 26 candidate variables and in-hospital CA. A risk-score model was developed and validated using a temporal cohort (n=126 073) comprising patients from SWEDEHEART between 2005 and 2007 and an external cohort (n=276 109) comprising patients from the Myocardial Ischaemia National Audit Project (MINAP) between 2008 and 2013.RESULTS: The incidence of in-hospital CA for NSTE-ACS and non-ACS was lower in the SWEDEHEART-derivation cohort than in MINAP (1.3% and 0.5% vs. 2.3% and 2.3%). A seven point, five variable risk score (age ≥60 years (1 point), ST-T abnormalities (2 points), Killip Class >1 (1 point), heart rate <50 or ≥100bpm (1 point), and systolic blood pressure <100mmHg (2 points) was developed. Model discrimination was good in the derivation cohort (c-statistic 0.72) and temporal validation cohort (c-statistic 0.74), and calibration was reasonable with a tendency towards overestimation of risk with a higher sum of score points. External validation showed moderate discrimination (c-statistic 0.65) and calibration showed a general underestimation of predicted risk.CONCLUSIONS: A simple points score containing five variables readily available on admission predicts in-hospital CA for patients with suspected NSTE-ACS.
|
|
| 6. |
- Ishak, Divan, et al.
(författare)
-
Association of beta-blockers beyond 1 year after myocardial infarction and cardiovascular outcomes
- 2023
-
Ingår i: Heart. - : BMJ Publishing Group Ltd. - 1355-6037 .- 1468-201X. ; 109:15, s. 1159-1165
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Objective Beta-blockers (BB) are an established treatment following myocardial infarction (MI). However, there is uncertainty as to whether BB beyond the first year of MI have a role in patients without heart failure or left ventricular systolic dysfunction (LVSD).Methods A nationwide cohort study was conducted including 43 618 patients with MI between 2005 and 2016 in the Swedish register for coronary heart disease. Follow-up started 1 year after hospitalisation (index date). Patients with heart failure or LVSD up until the index date were excluded. Patients were allocated into two groups according to BB treatment. Primary outcome was a composite of all-cause mortality, MI, unscheduled revascularisation and hospitalisation for heart failure. Outcomes were analysed using Cox and Fine-Grey regression models after inverse propensity score weighting.Results Overall, 34 253 (78.5%) patients received BB and 9365 (21.5%) did not at the index date 1 year following MI. The median age was 64 years and 25.5% were female. In the intention-to-treat analysis, the unadjusted rate of primary outcome was lower among patients who received versus not received BB (3.8 vs 4.9 events/100 person-years) (HR 0.76; 95% CI 0.73 to 1.04). Following inverse propensity score weighting and multivariable adjustment, the risk of the primary outcome was not different according to BB treatment (HR 0.99; 95% CI 0.93 to 1.04). Similar findings were observed when censoring for BB discontinuation or treatment switch during follow-up.Conclusion Evidence from this nationwide cohort study suggests that BB treatment beyond 1 year of MI for patients without heart failure or LVSD was not associated with improved cardiovascular outcomes.
|
|
| 7. |
- Mohammad, Moman A., et al.
(författare)
-
Development and validation of an artificial neural network algorithm to predict mortality and admission to hospital for heart failure after myocardial infarction : a nationwide population-based study
- 2022
-
Ingår i: The Lancet Digital Health. - : Elsevier. - 2589-7500. ; 4:1, s. 37-45
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Patients have an estimated mortality of 15–20% within the first year following myocardial infarction and one in four patients who survive myocardial infarction will develop heart failure, severely reducing quality of life and increasing the risk of long-term mortality. We aimed to establish the accuracy of an artificial neural network (ANN) algorithm in predicting 1-year mortality and admission to hospital for heart failure after myocardial infarction. Methods: In this nationwide population-based study, we used data for all patients admitted to hospital for myocardial infarction and discharged alive from a coronary care unit in Sweden (n=139 288) between Jan 1, 2008, and April 1, 2017, from the Swedish Web system for Enhancement and Development of Evidence-based care in Heart disease Evaluated According to Recommended Therapies (SWEDEHEART) nationwide registry; these patients were randomly divided into training (80%) and testing (20%) datasets. We developed an ANN using 21 variables (including age, sex, medical history, previous medications, in-hospital characteristics, and discharge medications) associated with the outcomes of interest with a back-propagation algorithm in the training dataset and tested it in the testing dataset. The ANN algorithm was then validated in patients with incident myocardial infarction enrolled in the Western Denmark Heart Registry (external validation cohort) between Jan 1, 2008, and Dec 31, 2016. The predictive ability of the model was evaluated using area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) and Youden's index was established as a means of identifying an empirical dichotomous cutoff, allowing further evaluation of model performance. Findings: 139 288 patients who were admitted to hospital for myocardial infarction in the SWEDEHEART registry were randomly divided into a training dataset of 111 558 (80%) patients and a testing dataset of 27 730 (20%) patients. 30 971 patients with myocardial infarction who were enrolled in the Western Denmark Heart Registry were included in the external validation cohort. A first event, either all-cause mortality or admission to hospital for heart failure 1 year after myocardial infarction, occurred in 32 308 (23·2%) patients in the testing and training cohorts only. For 1-year all-cause mortality, the ANN had an AUROC of 0·85 (95% CI 0·84–0·85) in the testing dataset and 0·84 (0·83–0·84) in the external validation cohort. The AUROC for admission to hospital for heart failure within 1 year was 0·82 (0·81–0·82) in the testing dataset and 0·78 (0·77–0·79) in the external validation dataset. With an empirical cutoff the ANN algorithm correctly classified 73·6% of patients with regard to all-cause mortality and 61·5% of patients with regard to admission to hospital for heart failure in the external validation cohort, ruling out adverse outcomes with 97·1–98·7% probability in the external validation cohort. Interpretation: Identifying patients at a high risk of developing heart failure or death after myocardial infarction could result in tailored therapies and monitoring by the allocation of resources to those at greatest risk. Funding: The Swedish Heart and Lung Foundation, Swedish Scientific Research Council, Swedish Foundation for Strategic Research, Knut and Alice Wallenberg Foundation, ALF Agreement on Medical Education and Research, Skane University Hospital, The Bundy Academy, the Märta Winkler Foundation, the Anna-Lisa and Sven-Eric Lundgren Foundation for Medical Research.
|
|
| 8. |
- Schiele, Francois, et al.
(författare)
-
2020 Update of the quality indicators for acute myocardial infarction: a position paper of the Association for Acute Cardiovascular Care: the study group for quality indicators from the ACVC and the NSTE-ACS guideline group
- 2021
-
Ingår i: European Heart Journal. - : OXFORD UNIV PRESS. - 2048-8726 .- 2048-8734. ; 10:2, s. 224-233
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Aims Quality indicators (QIs) are tools to improve the delivery of evidence-base medicine. In 2017, the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) Association for Acute Cardiovascular Care (ACVC) developed a set of QIs for acute myocardial infarction (AMI), which have been evaluated at national and international levels and across different populations. However, an update of these QIs is needed in light of the accumulated experience and the changes in the supporting evidence. Methods and results The ESC methodology for the QI development was used to update the 2017 ACVC QIs. We identified key domains of AMI care, conducted a literature review, developed a list of candidate QIs, and used a modified Delphi method to select the final set of indicators. The same seven domains of AMI care identified by the 2017 Study Group were retained for this update. For each domain, main and secondary QIs were developed reflecting the essential and complementary aspects of care, respectively. Overall, 26 QIs are proposed in this document, compared to 20 in the 2017 set. New QIs are proposed in this document (e.g. the centre use of high-sensitivity troponin), some were retained or modified (e.g. the in-hospital risk assessment), and others were retired in accordance with the changes in evidence [e.g. the proportion of patients with non-ST segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) treated with fondaparinux] and the feasibility assessments (e.g. the proportion of patients with NSTEMI whom risk assessment is performed using the GRACE and CRUSADE risk scores). Conclusion Updated QIs for the management of AMI were developed according to contemporary knowledge and accumulated experience. These QIs may be applied to evaluate and improve the quality of AMI care.
|
|
| 9. |
- Simonsson, Moa, et al.
(författare)
-
Development and Validation of a Novel Risk Score for In-Hospital Major Bleeding in Acute Myocardial Infarction : The SWEDEHEART Score
- 2019
-
Ingår i: Journal of the American Heart Association. - : WILEY. - 2047-9980 .- 2047-9980. ; 8:5
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background – Bleeding risk stratification in acute coronary syndrome is of highest clinical interest but current risk scores have limitations. We sought to develop and validate a new in-hospital bleeding risk score for patients with acute myocardial infarction.Methods and Results – From the nationwide SWEDEHEART (Swedish Web-System for Enhancement and Development of Evidence-Based Care in Heart Disease Evaluated According to Recommended Therapies) register, 97,597 patients with acute myocardial infarction enrolled from 2009 until 2014 were selected. A full model with 23 predictor variables and 8 interaction terms was fitted using logistic regression. The full model was approximated by a model with 5 predictors and 1 interaction term. Calibration, discrimination, and clinical utility was evaluated and compared with the ACTION (Acute Coronary Treatment and Intervention Outcomes Network) and CRUSADE (Can Rapid Risk Stratification of Unstable Angina Patients Suppress Adverse Outcomes With Early Implementation of the ACC/AHA Guidelines) scores. Internal and temporal validity was assessed. In-hospital major bleeding, defined as fatal, intracranial, or requiring surgery or blood transfusion, occurred in 1356 patients (1.4%). The 5 predictors in the approximate model that constituted the SWEDEHEART score were hemoglobin, age, sex, creatinine, and Creactive protein. The ACTION and CRUSADE scores were poorly calibrated in the derivation cohort and therefore were recalibrated. The SWEDEHEART score showed higher discriminative ability than both recalibrated scores, overall (C-index 0.80 versus 0.73/0.72) and in all predefined subgroups. Decision curve analysis demonstrated consistently positive and higher net benefit for the SWEDEHEART score compared with both recalibrated scores across all clinically relevant decision thresholds. The original ACTION and CRUSADE scores showed negative net benefit.Conclusions – The 5-item SWEDEHEART score discriminates in-hospital major bleeding in patients with acute myocardial infarction and has superior model performance compared with the recalibrated ACTION and CRUSADE scores.
|
|
| 10. |
- Yndigegn, Troels, et al.
(författare)
-
Registry-based randomised clinical trial : Efficient evaluation of generic pharmacotherapies in the contemporary era
- 2018
-
Ingår i: Heart. - : BMJ. - 1355-6037 .- 1468-201X. ; 104:19, s. 1562-1567
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Randomised clinical trials are the gold standard for testing the effectiveness of clinical interventions. However, increasing complexity and associated costs may limit their application in the investigation of key cardiovascular knowledge gaps such as the re-evaluation of generic pharmacotherapies. The registry-based randomised clinical trial (RRCT) leverages data sampling from nationwide quality registries to facilitate high participant inclusion rates at comparably low costs and, therefore, may offer a mechanism by which such clinical questions may be answered. To date, a number of studies have been conducted using such trial designs, but uncritical use of the RRCT design may lead to erroneous conclusions. The current review provides insights into the strengths and weaknesses of the RRCT, as well as provides an exploratory example of how a trial may be designed to test the long-term effectiveness of beta blockers in patients with myocardial infarction who have preserved left ventricular systolic function.
|
|
