OBJECTIVES: We describe the baseline characteristics and clinical course of patients who had an acute myocardial infarction (AMI) during their hospital stay. BACKGROUND: In comparison with patients who had an AMI outside of the hospital (prehospital AMI), the data on patients who had an AMI in the hospital are poorly described. METHODS: Patients with an in-hospital AMI were prospectively registered in the Southwest German Maximal Individual TheRapy in Acute myocardial infarction (MITRA) study and compared with patients with prehospital AMI. RESULTS: Of 5,888 patients with AMI, 403 patients (6.8%) had an in-hospital AMI. These patients were older, more often male and sicker as compared with the patients with a prehospital AMI. They also showed a higher prevalence of concomitant diseases, such as arterial hypertension, diabetes mellitus, renal insufficiency and contraindications for thrombolysis. There was no significant difference regarding the use of reperfusion therapy, either thrombolysis (in-hospital AMI 44.2% vs. prehospital AMI 49.1%; odds ratio [OR] 0.86, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.70 to 1.05) or primary angioplasty (9.9% vs. 8.2%; OR 1.23, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.73), or a combination of both, between the two groups. The interval from symptom onset to the start of treatment in patients receiving reperfusion therapy was 55 min for patients with an in-hospital AMI versus 180 min for patients with a prehospital AMI (p = 0.001). In-hospital death occurred in 110 (27.3%) of 403 patients with an in-hospital versus 762 (13.9%) of 5,485 patients with a prehospital AMI (OR 2.33, 95% CI 1.85 to 2.94). This was confirmed by logistic regression analysis after adjusting for other confounding variables (OR 1.67, 95% CI 1.23 to 2.24). CONCLUSIONS: In-hospital AMI occurred in 6.8% of patients. Time to intervention was shorter; however, the use of reperfusion therapy for in-hospital AMI was not different from that for prehospital AMI. In particular, primary angioplasty seems to be underused in these patients. This, as well as the selection of patients, may result in the high hospital mortality rate of 27.3%.
OBJECTIVES: We describe the baseline characteristics and clinical course of patients who had an acute myocardial infarction (AMI) during their hospital stay. BACKGROUND: In comparison with patients who had an AMI outside of the hospital (prehospital AMI), the data on patients who had an AMI in the hospital are poorly described. METHODS:Patients with an in-hospital AMI were prospectively registered in the Southwest German Maximal Individual TheRapy in Acute myocardial infarction (MITRA) study and compared with patients with prehospital AMI. RESULTS: Of 5,888 patients with AMI, 403 patients (6.8%) had an in-hospital AMI. These patients were older, more often male and sicker as compared with the patients with a prehospital AMI. They also showed a higher prevalence of concomitant diseases, such as arterial hypertension, diabetes mellitus, renal insufficiency and contraindications for thrombolysis. There was no significant difference regarding the use of reperfusion therapy, either thrombolysis (in-hospital AMI 44.2% vs. prehospital AMI 49.1%; odds ratio [OR] 0.86, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.70 to 1.05) or primary angioplasty (9.9% vs. 8.2%; OR 1.23, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.73), or a combination of both, between the two groups. The interval from symptom onset to the start of treatment in patients receiving reperfusion therapy was 55 min for patients with an in-hospital AMI versus 180 min for patients with a prehospital AMI (p = 0.001). In-hospital death occurred in 110 (27.3%) of 403 patients with an in-hospital versus 762 (13.9%) of 5,485 patients with a prehospital AMI (OR 2.33, 95% CI 1.85 to 2.94). This was confirmed by logistic regression analysis after adjusting for other confounding variables (OR 1.67, 95% CI 1.23 to 2.24). CONCLUSIONS: In-hospital AMI occurred in 6.8% of patients. Time to intervention was shorter; however, the use of reperfusion therapy for in-hospital AMI was not different from that for prehospital AMI. In particular, primary angioplasty seems to be underused in these patients. This, as well as the selection of patients, may result in the high hospital mortality rate of 27.3%.
Authors: Prashant Kaul; Jerome J Federspiel; Xuming Dai; Sally C Stearns; Sidney C Smith; Michael Yeung; Hadi Beyhaghi; Lei Zhou; George A Stouffer Journal: JAMA Date: 2014-11-19 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Emily B Levitan; Olusola Top Olubowale; Christopher M Gamboa; J David Rhodes; Todd M Brown; Paul Muntner; Luqin Deng; Monika M Safford Journal: Ann Epidemiol Date: 2015-02-12 Impact factor: 3.797
Authors: Huifeng Yun; Monika M Safford; Todd M Brown; Michael E Farkouh; Shia Kent; Pradeep Sharma; Meredith Kilgore; Vera Bittner; Robert S Rosenson; Elizabeth Delzell; Paul Muntner; Emily B Levitan Journal: J Am Heart Assoc Date: 2015-02-09 Impact factor: 5.501
Authors: Julia Stehli; Misha Dagan; Diem T Dinh; Jeffrey Lefkovits; Ron Dick; Stephanie Oxley; Angela L Brennan; Stephen J Duffy; Sarah Zaman Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2022-03-07 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Julia Stehli; Diem Dinh; Misha Dagan; Ron Dick; Stephanie Oxley; Angela Brennan; Jeffrey Lefkovits; Stephen J Duffy; Sarah Zaman Journal: Clin Cardiol Date: 2022-03-07 Impact factor: 3.287
Authors: Xuming Dai; Joseph Bumgarner; Andrew Spangler; Dane Meredith; Sidney C Smith; George A Stouffer Journal: J Am Heart Assoc Date: 2013-04-04 Impact factor: 5.501