Literature DB >> 30121176

The risk-treatment paradox in non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction patients according to their estimated GRACE risk.

Aet Saar1, Toomas Marandi2, Tiia Ainla3, Krista Fischer4, Mai Blöndal5, Jaan Eha6.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The purpose was to describe the treatment and outcomes of non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) in Estonia according to patients' estimated mortality risk by the Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events (GRACE) score and investigate if inequalities in treatment had an impact on prognosis.
METHODS: We performed a linkage between Estonian Myocardial Infarction Registry, Population Registry and Estonian Health Insurance Fund. All NSTEMI patients 2012-2014 were stratified into low (<4%), intermediate (4-12%), or high (>12%) mortality risk according to GRACE. All-cause mortality and composite endpoint of death, recurrent myocardial infarction, stroke or unplanned revascularization were compared between optimally - defined as concomitant in-hospital use of medicines from recommended groups and coronary angiography - and suboptimally managed patients, using the Cox regression.
RESULTS: Out of 3803 NSTEMI patients (median age 73 years, 44% women) 20% were classified into low, 35% into intermediate and 45% into high risk category. In these groups, respectively, 62%, 46% and 23% of patients received optimal in-hospital management. Over the mean follow-up of 2.4 years the association between suboptimal in-hospital management and outcomes was the following: in the low risk group mortality hazard ratio (HR) 1.6 (95% confidence interval 0.8-3.2), composite endpoint HR 1.2 (0.8-1.8); in the intermediate risk group mortality HR 2.4 (1.7-3.3), composite endpoint HR 1.8 (1.4-2.3); and in the high risk group mortality HR 2.2 (1.8-2.8), composite endpoint HR 1.6 (1.3-2.0).
CONCLUSIONS: Higher risk NSTEMI patients received less guideline-recommended in-hospital management, which was associated with a worse prognosis.
Copyright © 2018 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Acute myocardial infarction; Estonia; NSTEMI; Registry

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30121176     DOI: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2018.08.015

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Cardiol        ISSN: 0167-5273            Impact factor:   4.164


  11 in total

Review 1.  The myth of 'stable' coronary artery disease.

Authors:  Keith A A Fox; Marco Metra; João Morais; Dan Atar
Journal:  Nat Rev Cardiol       Date:  2019-07-29       Impact factor: 32.419

2.  Dropping risk stratification with subsequent treatment-risk paradox in non ST elevation acute coronary syndromes: a clinical audit in Iraq.

Authors:  Zainab Atiyah Dakhil; Hasan Ali Farhan
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2021-09-26       Impact factor: 2.655

3.  Adherence to recommendations for secondary prevention medications after myocardial infarction in Estonia: comparison of real-world data from 2004 to 2005 and 2017 to 2018.

Authors:  Piret Lõiveke; Toomas Marandi; Tiia Ainla; Krista Fischer; Jaan Eha
Journal:  BMC Cardiovasc Disord       Date:  2021-10-20       Impact factor: 2.298

4.  External validation of the GRACE risk score and the risk-treatment paradox in patients with acute coronary syndrome.

Authors:  Niels M R van der Sangen; Jaouad Azzahhafi; Dean R P P Chan Pin Yin; Joyce Peper; Senna Rayhi; Ronald J Walhout; Melvyn Tjon Joe Gin; Deborah M Nicastia; Jorina Langerveld; Georgios J Vlachojannis; Rutger J van Bommel; Yolande Appelman; José P S Henriques; Jurriën M Ten Berg; Wouter J Kikkert
Journal:  Open Heart       Date:  2022-03

5.  Untangling the difficult interplay between ischemic and hemorrhagic risk: The role of risk scores.

Authors:  Simone Persampieri; Diego Castini; Alessandro Lupi; Marco Guazzi
Journal:  World J Cardiol       Date:  2022-02-26

6.  Risk-associated management disparities in acute myocardial infarction.

Authors:  Kai M Eggers; T Jernberg; B Lindahl
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-12-29       Impact factor: 4.379

7.  Objective risk assessment vs standard care for acute coronary syndromes-The Australian GRACE Risk tool Implementation Study (AGRIS): a process evaluation.

Authors:  Janice Gullick; John Wu; Derek Chew; Chris Gale; Andrew T Yan; Shaun G Goodman; Donna Waters; Karice Hyun; David Brieger
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2022-03-22       Impact factor: 2.655

8.  Comparison of the CAMI-NSTEMI and GRACE Risk Model for Predicting In-Hospital Mortality in Chinese Non-ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction Patients.

Authors:  Peng Wang; Hongliang Cong; Ying Zhang; Yujie Liu
Journal:  Cardiol Res Pract       Date:  2020-07-24       Impact factor: 1.866

9.  Association between Adherence to Guideline-Recommended Preventive Medications and In-Hospital Mortality among Non-Reperfused ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction Patients Admitted to a Tertiary Care Academic Center in a Developing Country.

Authors:  Sylvi Irawati; Surya Dharma; Katja Taxis; Thang Nguyen; Nunung Nursyarofah; Bob Wilffert; Eelko Hak
Journal:  Glob Heart       Date:  2020-02-06

10.  Current Status and Hospital-Level Differences in Care and Outcomes of Patients With Acute Non-ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction in China: Insights From China Acute Myocardial Infarction Registry.

Authors:  Qinghao Zhao; Haiyan Xu; Xuan Zhang; Yunqing Ye; Qiuting Dong; Rui Fu; Hui Sun; Xinxin Yan; Xiaojin Gao; Jingang Yang; Yang Wang; Yuejin Yang
Journal:  Front Cardiovasc Med       Date:  2022-01-17
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.