The Prognostic Value of Blood Glucose in Diabetic Patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction

The aim of the study was to investigate prospectively the prognostic value of blood glucose on admission in diabetic and non-diabetic patients with an acute myocardial infarction. Three hundred and thirty-three diabetic and 565 non-diabetic patients were admitted with acute myocardial infarction during the study period of 3.5 years. There was a significant association between mortality and blood glucose on admission in diabetic patients (regression coefficient, r=0.92, 0.5<p<0.02) but not in non-diabetic individuals (r=0.69, 0.2<p<0.5). Age- and sex-standardized mortality was higher in the diabetic group (12.2% vs 7.4%, p<0.03), but was identical if standardized also for blood glucose on admission. We conclude that a high blood glucose on admission is a bad prognostic indicator in a diabetic patient with an acute myocardial infarction. The excess mortality in diabetic patients with acute myocardial infarction can be attributed to the higher proportion with hyperglycaemia.     

Outcome of Unstable Angina in Patients with Diabetes Mellitus

This prospective hospital-based, case–control study compares the outcome of unstable angina in non-insulin dependent diabetic patients and non-diabetic control subjects. One hundred and sixty-two diabetic patients and 162 non-diabetic control patients with unstable angina were entered into the study. The 3-month mortality was 8.6 % (95 % confidence interval, CI = 4.4–12.9 %) in diabetic patients and 2.5 % (CI = 0.1–4.9 %) in control patients (p = 0.014). The 1-year mortality was 16.7 % (CI = 10.9 %–22.4 %) in diabetic patients and 8.6 % (CI = 4.4 %–12.9 %) in non-diabetic patients (p = 0.029). Diabetic patients received beta-blockade and underwent coronary angiography and angioplasty less frequently than controls; the frequency of unstable angina, of acute myocardial infarction, and of coronary artery bypass grafting was similar in both groups at 1 year of follow-up. It is concluded that diabetic patients with unstable angina have a higher mortality than non-diabetic patients and that this difference is largely accounted for by early (first 3 months) mortality. © 1997 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Hospital outcome of acute myocardial infarction in patients with and without diabetes mellitus.

AIMS: To assess hospital mortality and morbidity in diabetic and non-diabetic patients with acute myocardial infarction and to compare the results between the two groups. METHODS: All patients admitted in 1999 to the intensive care unit of the Schwabing City Hospital with diagnosis of acute myocardial infarction were assessed for hospital mortality and co-morbidity. RESULTS: Three hundred and thirty patients with acute myocardial infarction were admitted. Of those, 126 (38%) were diabetic and 204 (62%) were non-diabetic patients. Mortality within 24 h after admission was 13.5% in diabetic patients and 5.4% in non-diabetic patients (P<0.01). Mortality during entire hospitalization was higher in diabetic than in non-diabetic patients (29.4% vs. 16.2%; P=0.004). Diabetic patients were resuscitated more frequently than non-diabetic patients (24% vs. 11%, P<0.01). In diabetic patients, heart rate at admission was increased (91 +/- 27 vs. 82 +/- 23/min; P<0.01) and presence of angina pectoris was reported less frequently (59% (n=72) vs. 82% (n=167); P<0.001). Preceding myocardial infarction, microalbuminuria, peripheral artery disease and arterial hypertension were more frequent in diabetic than in non-diabetic patients. Diabetic patients demonstrated higher C-reactive protein (CRP) levels than non-diabetic patients (91.4 +/- 78.2 mg/l vs. 45.2 +/- 62.4 mg/l; P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In diabetic patients with acute myocardial infarction, early hospital mortality is increased and signs of cardiac autonomic dysfunction and microangiopathy are detected more frequently than in non-diabetic patients. The need for advanced treatment strategies early in the course of diabetic patients with myocardial infarction is emphasized.     

The impact of diabetes mellitus on survival after myocardial infarction: can it be modified by drug treatment?

Aims/hypothesis. Mortality of diabetic patients after myocardial infarction remains high despite recent improvement in their management. This study population-based evaluates the impact of cardiovascular drug therapy on mortality within 28 days and during 5-year follow-up in diabetic compared with non-diabetic patients.¶Methods. Using the MONICA Augsburg register from 1985 to 1992, 2210 inpatients with incident Q-wave myocardial infarction aged 25–74 years were included, of whom 468 had diabetes. Primary end point was mortality within 28 days and over 5 years. General linear model procedures were used for age-adjustment, controlling for sex, and testing significance; hazard risk ratios were calculated using multivariable Cox proportional hazards model procedures.¶Results. During the 5-year follow-up, 598 subjects died (396 diabetic, 202 non-diabetic). The mortality rate within 28 days was 12.6 % in diabetic patients (women 18.0 %, men 9.9 %) and 7.3 % in non-diabetic patients (p = 0.001). Mortality in diabetic patients over 5 years was increased by 64 % (95 % confidence interval 1.39–1.95) compared with non-diabetic patients. This was considerably reduced (p < 0.001) in patients treated with thrombolytic drugs (risk ratio: diabetes 0.57, no diabetes 0.65) and with beta blockers (0.62 and 0.64) and antiplatelets (0.76 and 0.74) at hospital discharge. Mortality of diabetic patients treated with these drugs was reduced to that of non-diabetic patients without such treatment (risk ratio 1.01 to 1.27; p > 0.1).¶Conclusion/interpretation. Diabetic patients after myocardial infarction are at particularly high risk of dying, but benefit clearly from treatment with thrombolytics, beta blockers and antiplatelets. This study does not, however, allow any inferences to be drawn for treatment with angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors or the impact of left ventricular function. [Diabetologia (2000) 43: 218–226]     

Thrombolytic therapy use for acute myocardial infarction and outcome in Qatar

OBJECTIVE: Data on the outcome of patients treated with thrombolytic therapy in the Arab world is scarce. The main objective of this study is to study the 7-day morbidity and mortality rate and the rate of use of thrombolytic therapy in patients presenting with acute myocardial infarction treated with thrombolytic therapy in the Middle East. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data for all patients who were admitted to Coronary Care Unit in Cardiology Department in Hamad Medical during the period (1991-2001). Patients were divided into two groups in relation to ethnicity whether they received thrombolysis or not. In each group, the number of patients, age at the time of admission, gender, cardiovascular risk profile, therapy and outcome in regard of in-hospital complication and 7-day death as primary end point were analyzed. RESULTS: Of the total 5388 patients admitted with acute myocardial infarction during the 10-year period, 66.3% (3567) with STE MI were found, 61.4% (2190) of them received thrombolytic therapy while 38.6% (1377) were not eligible for thrombolytic therapy. The remaining 33.7% (1821) were admitted with non-STE MI. In consideration of ethnic variation, patients with STE MI eligible for thrombolytic therapy, 29.6% (1598) were Qataris and 70.4% (3792) were non-Qataris. Thrombolytic therapy was administered to 25.9% (414) of Qatari patients and 51.3% (1947) of non-Qataris. The mortality rate of Qatari patients who received thrombolytic therapy was 9.2% (38) vs. 19.5% (231) who did not receive thrombolytic therapy (p<0.001). In non-Qatari patients, the mortality rate was 5.2% (102) for those who received thrombolytic therapy, while it was 8.6% (159) for those with no thrombolytic therapy (p<0.001). When compared to male patients, female patients with thrombolytic therapy had higher mortality rates (in both Qataris and non-Qataris) (20.5% vs. 6.1%; p value<0.001 and 16.1% vs. 9.4%; p<0.001, respectively), there were no significant differences between the ethnic groups in regard to in-hospital complications. Patients treated with thrombolytic therapy had lower incidence of in-hospital complication regarding acute heart failure, post-myocardial angina, heart block and arrhythmia. Thrombolytic therapy reduced mortality rate in acute myocardial infarction by 69%. Logistic regression analysis had shown that arrhythmia, acute heart failure, heart block, cardiogenic shock, diabetes mellitus and stroke were independent predictors of increased mortality. Thrombolysis was used in 61.4%, which is still underutilized when compared to a few available studies in the Gulf area, and to other studies in the developed world. CONCLUSION: In the current study, use of thrombolysis in acute myocardial infarction was associated with significant decrease in in-hospital mortality and morbidity. Mortality rate was higher in the Qatari nationals when compared to non-Qataris. Reperfusion therapy may be underutilized in the developing world. Increased use of reperfusion therapy would result in reduced mortality rate. Global measures to encourage the use of reperfusion therapy including patients' education, and strategies to improve the health care system are needed.     

Rate and mode of death during five years of follow-up among patients with acute chest pain with and without a history of diabetes mellitus

In order to determine the effect of diabetes on the mortality rate and mode of death during 5 years of follow-up among patients who came to the emergency department with acute chest pain or other symptoms suggestive of acute myocardial infarction (AMI), all patients thus presenting to one single hospital during a period of 21 months were followed for 5 years. In total 5230 patients were included, of whom 402 (8 %) had a history of diabetes. Patients with diabetes differed from those without by being older, having a higher prevalence of previously diagnosed cardiovascular diseases, having less symptoms of chest pain and more symptoms of acute severe heart failure, and more electrocardiographic (ECG) abnormalities on admission. Diabetic patients had a 5-year mortality of 53.5 % as compared with 23.3 % among non-diabetic patients (p < 0.001; adjusted risk ratio 1.60; 95% confidence limits 1.35–1.90). Among diabetic patients the following appeared as independent predictors of death: age (p < 0.001), ST-segment elevation on admission (p < 0.001), a history of myocardial infarction (p < 0.05), and a non-pathological ECG on admission (p < 0.001). We conclude that among diabetic patients admitted to the emergency department with acute chest pain or other symptoms suggestive of AMI more than 50 % are dead 5 years later. Future research should focus on interventions in order to reduce their mortality. © 1998 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Impact of diabetes mellitus on long-term outcome after unstable angina and non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction treated with a very early invasive strategy

Aims/hypothesis We sought to evaluate the impact of diabetes mellitus on long-term outcome in patients with unstable angina and non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction treated with a very early invasive strategy.Methods We carried out a prospective cohort study in 270 diabetic and 1163 non-diabetic patients with unstable angina and non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. All patients underwent coronary angiography and, if appropriate, subsequent revascularisation within 24 hours of admission. The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality during follow-up for up to 60 months.Results Diabetic patients had less favourable baseline characteristics including more advanced coronary artery disease and more severe unstable angina and non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. Percutaneous coronary intervention was performed in 53% of diabetic patients and 56% of non-diabetic patients. Coronary artery bypass grafting was done in 21% of diabetic patients and 12% of non-diabetic patients. In-hospital mortality (4.1% vs 1.3%; hazard ratio 3.47; 95% CI: 1.57 to 7.64; p=0.002) and long-term mortality (9.7% vs 4.9%; hazard ratio 2.11; 95% CI: 1.33 to 3.36; p=0.002) were significantly higher in diabetic patients. After adjustment for differences in baseline characteristics, diabetes mellitus was no longer an independent predictor of long-term mortality (hazard ratio 1.43; 95% CI: 0.74 to 2.78; p=0.292).Conclusions/interpretation Diabetic patients treated with a very early invasive strategy for unstable angina and non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction have a higher in-hospital and long-term mortality that is largely explained by their less favourable baseline characteristics including more advanced coronary artery disease and more severe unstable angina and non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction.Abbreviations CK creatine phosphokinase - FRISC Fragmin and fast Revascularisation during InStability in Coronary artery disease - OASIS Organisation to Assess Strategies for Ischemic Syndromes - TACTICS-TIMI 18 Treat angina with Aggrastat and determine Cost of Therapy with an Invasive or Conservative Strategy—Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction 18 - UA/NSTEMI unstable angina and non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction     

Managing the diabetic patient with acute myocardial infarction

The diabetic patient has a substantially increased in-hospital mortality after acute myocardial infarction, which is around twice that of non-diabetic subjects. A number of interventions can substantially improve this outcome. The use of thrombolytic therapy reduces case fatality proportionately to a similar degree to that in non-diabetic patients, but because of the higher background risk, absolute benefits are substantially greater. In the world literature, there is just one reported case of intraocular haemorrhage after thrombolysis in a diabetic patient, and that resolved in 3 weeks, meaning that anxieties around theoretical adverse effects of thrombolysis should not preclude its use. There is no evidence regarding the advantages of any one thrombolytic agent in these subjects. Aspirin treatment again has similar benefits to those in non-diabetic subjects, and should be administered at presentation. Some evidence suggests that a higher dose of aspirin should be used in diabetic, compared to non-diabetic, patients. Finally, the DIGAMI Study has shown that insulin and glucose infusion during the hospital admission, followed by multiple injection therapy thereafter, reduces mortality by around one-third, both at 12 months and at around 3½ years. Whether these advantages are because of improved early or late glycaemic control, or because of withdrawal of sulphonylureas, is still unclear, but this uncertainty should not stand in the way of introducing policies for insulin infusion in all diabetic patients admitted with acute myocardial infarction. © 1998 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Direct angioplasty for acute myocardial infarction. A review of outcomes in clinical subsets.

PURPOSE: To review the usefulness of angioplasty done early in the course of an acute myocardial infarction without preceding thrombolytic therapy. DATA SOURCES: The English-language literature was searched from 1983 through October 1991 using MEDLINE; bibliographies from selected articles were searched by hand. STUDY SELECTION: Series reporting results for direct angioplasty without preceding thrombolytic therapy were reviewed. Twenty-three articles describing a total of 4368 patients were found. DATA EXTRACTION: After duplicate patient series were eliminated, weighted average short- and long-term mortality rates were calculated for the remaining 2073 patients in 10 series and for selected clinical subsets. RESULTS OF DATA SYNTHESIS: Average hospital mortality for patients with acute myocardial infarction having direct angioplasty was 8.3% (95% Cl, 7.1% to 9.5%). Patients in cardiogenic shock had the highest mortality (44.2%; Cl, 35.9% to 52.5%); patients with one-vessel disease had the lowest (1%; Cl, 0% to 2.3%). For patients in cardiogenic shock, data on direct angioplasty appeared superior to data for similar patients receiving thrombolytic therapy. Although few data exist, a survival advantage was also suggested for patients with a history of previous bypass surgery (hospital mortality, 11.1% [Cl, 4.4% to 17.8%]). CONCLUSIONS: Direct angioplasty has an overall mortality similar to that of thrombolytic therapy. Patients who may benefit more from mechanical revascularization than from thrombolytic therapy include those at increased risk for thrombolytic therapy (uncontrolled hypertension, recent major surgery, cerebrovascular accident, prolonged cardiopulmonary resuscitation, or bleeding diathesis), and those with cardiogenic shock. The efficacy in several other patient subsets (age greater than 65 years, previous coronary artery bypass grafting, prolonged delay before reperfusion) warrants further study.     

Myocardial infarction in diabetic vs non-diabetic subjects. Survival and infarct size following therapy with sulfonylureas (glibenclamide)

AIMS: Sulfonylureas may interfere with 'ischaemic preconditioning' and worsen the prognosis in diabetic patients with acute myocardial infarction. METHODS AND RESULTS: Three hundred and fifty-seven non-diabetic patients admitted with acute myocardial infarction to one hospital over 6.5 years (72 deaths, in-hospital mortality 20.2%) were compared to 245 Type 2 diabetic patients categorized as having taken sulfonylureas (glibenclamide 7+/-3 mg x day(-1); n = 76, 25 deaths = 32.9%;P = 0.025), not having taken sulfonylureas (n = 89, 29 deaths = 33.0%;P = 0.012), and newly diagnosed as having diabetes (n = 80, 20 deaths = 25.0%). Survival was significantly different (log-rank test: P = 0.03). Increments in creatine kinase and creatine kinase(MB)activity were higher in non-diabetic patients (P<0.01). CONCLUSIONS: In-hospital mortality in Type 2 diabetic patients is higher than in non-diabetic patients suffering acute myocardial infarction regardless of whether or not they had been treated with sulfonylureas. Glibenclamide does not enlarge myocardial necroses.     

Long-term prognosis of young patients after myocardial infarction in the thrombolytic era

Background: Myocardial infarction (MI) in young adults is a rare event. In the Framingham study, the 10-year incidence rate of MI per 1,000 was 12.9 in men 30–34 years old. Overall, 4–8% of patients with acute MI are ≤ 40 years old. Hypothesis: It was the purpose of this study to assess the in-hospital and long-term morbidity and mortality in patients ≤40 years old with acute myocardial infarction compared with older patients in the thrombolytic era. Methods: A consecutive series of 75 patients aged ≤40 years (mean 35.0 ± 4.8) with acute myocardial infarction was compared with an equally sized group of patients aged >40 years (mean 65.1 ± 9.8). Results: Thrombolysis or direct percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty was performed in 52 versus 24% (p = 0.0004) and 5.3 versus 2.7% (p = NS) in younger and older patients, respectively. Significantly fewer young patients had multivessel disease (28 vs. 64%, p < 0.004). No in-hospital mortality was observed in patients with reperfusion therapy irrespective of age. After a mean followup time of 47 ± 35 months, cardiac mortality was 0 and 11% (p < 0.03), respectively, in young and older patients with, and 3 versus 24% (p < 0.02) without reperfusion therapy, respectively. In addition, significantly fewer patients in the younger age group developed recurrent angina pectoris (12 vs. 39%, p = 0.0004) or congestive heart failure (9 vs. 34%, p = 0.0005) irrespective of reperfusion therapy. Conclusion: Our observations demonstrate that long-term prognosis after myocardial infarction in young patients is excellent in the thrombolytic era.     

Use of thrombolytic treatment in patients with acute myocardial infarction in Spain. Observations from the PRIAMHO study

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: Scarce information is actually available in our country regarding the use of thrombolytic treatment in patients with acute myocardial infarction and how consistently the recommendations of the clinical guidelines are being implemented. METHODS: Cohort study with one year follow-up of patients with acute myocardial infarction admitted in 24 Spanish hospitals in 1995. Differences in clinical characteristics and prognosis from patients treated with or without thrombolysis were compared. RESULTS: 2,191 of the 5,242 patients (42%) admitted with an acute myocardial infarction received thrombolytic therapy (range: 23%-63%). Reasons for exclusion in the rest were the absence of ST segment elevation (35%), contraindications (16%), prehospital delay >12 h (35%), and other causes (15%). Thrombolysis treated patients were at lower risk in general because they had shorter prehospital delays and were younger, more likely to be male, less frequently diabetic, with less prior history of angina or infarction. The average delay in administering therapy was of 3 hours while the average in-hospital delay was 50 minutes and depended only on the hospital where patients where admitted, as it was shorter in small centers. t-PA was administered in 49% of patients, streptoquinase in 46% and other drugs in 5%. Although t-PA was given more often to younger patients, smokers, anterior and Q-wave infarctions, and to patients with shorter prehospital delays, the determinant factor was the admission hospital with a frequency ranging from 9% to 96%. Patients not treated with thrombolytics had more complications during the acute phase, and required more invasive procedures. They also had a higher mortality at 28 days (17% vs. 10%, p < 0.0001) and at one-year follow-up (27% vs. 15%, p < 0.0001). Furthermore, a correlation was observed between mortality and delay of treatment application. In multivariate analysis, thrombolytic treatment was an independent predictor of survival at one year, with an odds ratio for mortality of 0.8 (95% CI: 0.66-0.96). CONCLUSIONS: Thrombolytic therapy in Spain does not yet conform to the recommendations of the actual guidelines for the treatment of patients with acute myocardial infarction because it is underused, especially in high-risk patients, the prehospital and in-hospital delays are too long, and a huge variability exists between hospitals in the frequency and delays of administration and selection of the drug that are not sufficiently explained by the characteristics of the patients. In spite of this, mortality of treated patients was 20% lower in comparison to the non-treated patients, after adjusting for the other clinical factors with demonstrated prognostic value.     

Prognosis of Acute Myocardial Infarction in Diabetic and Non-diabetic Patients

We evaluated the prognosis of 858 patients with acute myocardial infarction (MI), of whom 97 (11%) had a history of diabetes mellitus. Among patients with diabetes the 1-year mortality rate was 41% versus 26% for non-diabetic patients (p < 0.01), and the 1-year reinfarction rates were 23% and 14%, respectively (p = 0.05). Diabetic patients with a history of hypertension had a similar mortality rate as comapred with diabetic patients without hypertension. In a multivariate analysis including age and history of cardiovascular disease, diabetes did not significantly contribute to death or reinfarction. Among diabetic patients the only independent risk factor for death was age. The place and mode of death appeared similar in the two groups. Patients with and without a history of diabetes had a similar infarct size. We conclude that diabetic patients with acute myocardial infarction have a very poor prognosis. Within 1 year nearly half of them are dead and one-quarter develop reinfarction. The mode of death appeared to be similar in diabetic patients as compared with non-diabetic patients.     

Management and short-term outcome of diabetic patients hospitalized for acute myocardial infarction: results of a nationwide French survey

OBJECTIVES: To compare management and short-term outcome of diabetic and non-diabetic patients hospitalized for acute myocardial infarction. METHODS: This was a prospective epidemiological survey. All patients admitted in coronary care units in France in November 2000 for confirmed acute myocardial infarction were eligible to enter the study. RESULTS: Of the 2320 patients recruited from 369 centers, 487 were diabetic (21%). Compared to non-diabetic patients, diabetic patients were 5 years older, more often female, obese and hypertensive; they had more often a history of cardiovascular disease; they had a lower ejection fraction and worse Killip class. Reperfusion therapy was less frequent among diabetic patients (39% versus 51%; p=0.0001), as was the use of beta-blockers (61% versus 72%; p=0.0001), aspirin (83% versus 89%; p=0.0001) and statins (52% versus 60%; p=0.001) during hospitalization. Conversely, the use of ACE-inhibitors was more frequent (54% versus 44%; p=0.0001). 58% of diabetic patients received insulin during hospitalization. Twenty-eight-day mortality was 13.1% in diabetic patients and 7.0% in non-diabetic patients (risk ratio: 1.87; p=0.001). Diabetes remained associated with increased mortality after adjustment for relevant risk factors including age and ejection fraction (risk ratio: 1.51; p=0.07). In patients treated with antidiabetic drugs (chiefly sulfonylureas) before admission, 28-day mortality was 10.4% compared with 19.9% in diabetic patients on diet alone or untreated (p=0.005). CONCLUSION: Despite higher cardiovascular risk and worse prognosis, in-hospital management of diabetic patients with acute myocardial infarction remains sub-optimal. Patients previously treated with antidiabetic drugs including sulfonylureas had a better prognosis than untreated diabetic patients.     

Under utilisation of evidence-based treatment partially explains for the unfavourable prognosis in diabetic patients with acute myocardial infarction.

AIMS: The prognosis after an acute myocardial infarction is worse for patients with diabetes mellitus than for those without. We investigated whether differences in the use of evidence-based treatment may contribute to the differences in 1-year survival in a large cohort of consecutive acute myocardial infarction patients with and without diabetes mellitus. METHODS: We included patients below the age of 80 years from the Register of Information and Knowledge about Swedish Heart Intensive care Admissions (RIKS-HIA), which included all patients admitted to coronary care units at 58 hospitals during 1995-1998. In all 5193 patients had the combination of acute myocardial infarction and diabetes mellitus while 20440 had myocardial infarction but no diabetes diagnosed. Multivariate logistical regression analyses were performed to evaluate the influence of diabetes mellitus on the use of evidence-based treatment and its association with survival during the first year after the index hospitalisation. RESULTS: The prevalence of diabetes mellitus was 20.3% (males 18.5%; females 24.4%). The 1-year mortality was substantially higher among diabetic patients compared with those without diabetes mellitus (13.0 vs. 22.3% for males and 14.4 vs. 26.1% for female patients, respectively) with an odds ratio (OR) (95% confidence interval (CI)) in three different age groups: <65 years 2.65 (2.23-3.16); 65-74 years 1.81 (1.61-2.04) and >75 years 1.71 (1.50-1.93). During hospital stay patients with diabetes mellitus received significantly less treatment with heparins (37 vs. 43%; p<0.001), intravenous beta blockade (29 vs. 33%; p<0.001), thrombolysis (31 vs. 41%; p<0.001) and acute revascularisation (4 vs. 5%; p<0.003). A similar pattern was apparent at hospital discharge. After multiple adjustments for dissimilarities in baseline characteristics between the two groups, patients with diabetes were significantly less likely to be treated with reperfusion therapy (OR 0.83), heparins (OR 0.88), statins (OR 0.88) or to be revascularised within 14 days from hospital discharge procedures (OR 0.86) while the use of ACE-inhibitors was more prevalent among diabetic patients compared to non-diabetic patients (OR 1.45). The mortality reducing effects of evidence-based treatment like reperfusion, heparins, aspirin, beta-blockers, lipid-lowering treatment and revascularisation were, in multivariate analyses, of equal benefit in diabetic and non-diabetic patients. INTERPRETATION: Diabetes mellitus continues to be a major independent predictor of 1-year mortality following an acute myocardial infarction, especially in younger age groups. This may partly be explained by less use of evidence-based treatment although treatment benefits are similar in both patients with and without diabetes mellitus. Thus a more extensive use of established treatment has a potential to improve the poor prognosis among patients with acute myocardial infarction and diabetes mellitus.     

Age-Specific Differences in the Use of Thrombolytic Therapy and Hospital Outcomes in Patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction: A Community-Wide Perspective

Background: Relatively limited information is available about recent, and trends over time, use of thrombolytic therapy in patients of different ages hospitalized with acute myocardial infarction and the association between use of thrombolytic therapy and hospital outcomes. Methods: We conducted an observational study of 5601 residents of the Worcester, Massachusetts, metropolitan area (1990 census = 437,000) with confirmed acute myocardial infarction in all local hospitals during 6 one-year periods between 1990 and 1999. Results: Despite relatively stable use of thrombolytic therapy between 1990 and 1995, decreases in the use of thrombolytic therapy in all patients with acute myocardial infarction were observed in 1997 and 1999. There was a 1.6 fold decrease in the use of thrombolytic therapy between 1990 and 1999 in patients <65 years. Patients 65–74 years (33.7% 1990; 11.7% 1999) and those 75 years and older (10.8% 1990; 6.7% 1999) experienced marked decreases in the receipt of thrombolytic therapy over time. Use of thrombolytic therapy was associated with reduced hospital mortality in each of the four age-specific groups under study (<55, 55–64, 65–74, 75) through the degree of benefit on hospital death rates associated with the use of thrombolytic therapy was attenuated after adjustment for additional confounders. Conclusions: Our findings indicate recent declines in the use of thrombolytic therapy in middle-aged and elderly patients with acute myocardial infarction. The impact of thrombolytic therapy on hospital outcomes was observed in each of our age strata under study though the magnitude of absolute and relative benefit varied according to age. Miniabstract. Declines in the use of thrombolytic therapy were observed between 1900 and 1999 in a population-based sample of patients with acute myocardial infarction. Use of thrombolytic therapy was associated with improved hospital survival to varying degrees in each of the age groups under study.     

Myocardial infarct size and mortality in patients with non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus

Abstract. Objectives. To study the infarct size and mortality in patients with non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus (NIDDM) and in non-diabetic subjects with their first acute myocardial infarction. Design. Seven year follow-up study of large representative cohorts of patients with non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus and non-diabetic subjects (study 1) and the FINMONICA acute myocardial infarction register study in 1988-89 (study 2). Setting. Populations of the districts of the Kuopio University Hospital and Turku University Central Hospital (study 1). Populations of Kuopio and North Karelia provinces and Turku/Loimaa area (study 2). Subjects. Study 1: 1059 patients with non-insulin dependent diabetes mellitus and 1373 non-diabetic subjects aged 45–64 years at baseline; during the follow-up 166 patients with non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus (91 men and 75 women) and 30 non-diabetic subjects (25 men and five women) were hospitalized for their first acute myocardial infarction. Study 2: 1622 patients aged 25–64 years hospitalized for their first acute myocardial infarction; 144 patients (90 men and 54 women) had non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus and 1153 (890 men and 263 women) were non-diabetic. Main outcome measures. The infarct size was assessed on the basis of maximum levels of serum cardiac enzymes (studies 1 and 2) and QRS-score (study 1). Results. No differences were found in maximum levels of serum cardiac enzymes between diabetic and non-diabetic patients. Similarly QRS-score gave no suggestion of a difference in infarct size between diabetic and non-diabetic patients. In both studies mortality before hospital admission was similar in diabetic and non-diabetic patients, but mortality within 28 days from hospital admission was twice as high in diabetic patients as in non-diabetic patients. Cardiac failure was the main cause of death significantly more often in diabetic patients than in non-diabetic patients (study 2). Conclusions. Poorer prognosis of acute myocardial infarction in diabetic patients appears not to be explained by a larger infarct size but probably by adverse effects of the diabetic state itself on myocardial function.     

Outcome of patients with acute myocardial infarction who are ineligible for thrombolytic therapy

OBJECTIVE: To determine what proportion of patients with acute myocardial infarction are not eligible for thrombolytic therapy and to assess their natural history. DESIGN: Retrospective chart review. SETTING: A large community-based hospital. PATIENTS: All patients with acute myocardial infarction hospitalized during a 27-month period. MEASUREMENTS: Of 1471 patients with acute myocardial infarction, 230 (16%) received thrombolytic therapy according to the protocol and an additional 97 (7%) received nonprotocol thrombolytic therapy, primary coronary balloon angioplasty, or both because of contraindications. The other 1144 patients (78%) did not receive reperfusion therapy. MAIN RESULTS: The patients who did not receive thrombolytic therapy were older, more likely to be women, and more likely to have a history of hypertension, previous myocardial infarction, or chronic angina (all comparisons, P less than 0.002). An average of 1.9 reasons for exclusion were identified per patient among the ineligible patients. Mortality was fivefold higher among ineligible patients (19%; Cl, 16% to 21%) than among protocol-treated patients (4%; Cl, 1% to 6%) (P less than 0.001). In-hospital mortality rates for excluded patients were 28% (Cl, 23% to 32%) in elderly patients (age, greater than 76 years; n = 396); 29% (Cl, 23% to 35%) in patients with stroke or bleeding risk (n = 209); 17% (Cl, 14% to 20%) in patients with delayed presentation (greater than 4 hours after the onset of chest pain; [n = 599]); 14% (Cl, 11% to 16%) in patients with an ineligible electrocardiogram (ECG) (n = 673); and 26% (Cl, 21% to 32%) in patients with a miscellaneous reason for exclusion (n = 243). Independent predictors of increased mortality were: age greater than 76 years, stroke or other bleeding risk, ineligible ECG, or the presence of two or more exclusion criteria. CONCLUSIONS: Thrombolytic therapy is currently used in the United States for only a minority of patients with acute myocardial infarction: those who have low-risk prognostic characteristics.     

Eligibility for and benefit of thrombolytic therapy in inferior myocardial infarction: Focus on the prognostic importance of right ventricular infarction

Objectives. This study was undertaken to determine eligibility for and benefit of thrombolytic therapy in patients with acute inferior myocardial infarction with or without right ventricular involvement.Background. Right ventricular involvement commonly complicates acute inferior myocardlal infarction and is considered to have prognostic relevance. We hypothesized that the presence of right ventricular infarction, diagnosed early by ST segment elevation in the right precordial lead (V₄R), may be of clinical importance in identifying patients who will benefit most from thrombolytic therapy.Methods. We studied 200 consecutive patients with acute inferior myocardial infarction to assess the prognostic impact of right ventricular infarction in those considered eligible or ineligible for reperfusion therapy. Prognostic analyses were based on the in-hospital period and a 1- to 6-year follow-up (mean [±SD] 37 ± 12 months).Results. ST segment elevation in lead V₄R was a reliable marker of right ventricular infarction (sensitivity 88%, specificity 78%, diagnostic efficiency 83%) in 107 patients (54%) with inferior myocardial infarction. Seventy-one eligible patients (36%) received thrombolytic therapy and had a lower mortality (8% [6 of 71]) and complication (31% [22 of 71]) rate than ineligible patients (mortality rate 25% [32 of 129], p < 0.001; complication rate 56% [72 of 129], p < 0.01). However, the overall benifit of thrombolysis was restricted to patients with right ventricular infarction complicating acute inferior myocardial infarction (with vs. without thrombolysis, respectively: mortality rate 10% vs. 42%, p < 0.005; complication rate 34% vs. 54%, p < 0.05). In the absence of right ventricular infarction, no difference was observed in the mortality (7% vs. 6%, p = NS) and major in-hospital complication (27% vs. 29%, p = NS) rates, whether or not the patient underwent thrombolytic therapy. Posthospital course over 37 ± 12 months was not different in patients with and without right ventricular infarction but was best in all patients considered for reperfusion therapy.Conclusions. During acute inferior myocardial infarction, the right precordial electrocardiogram is a simple but promising variable to identify a subgroup of patients with an unfavorable course who will benefit most from thrombolytic therapy.     

Primary angioplasty reduces risk of myocardial rupture compared to thrombolysis for acute myocardial infarction

Although the mechanical complications of acute ventricular septal defect and acute mitral regurgitation are uncommon after acute myocardial infarction, these complications are associated with an extremely high morbidity and mortality. We hypothesized that the administration of thrombolytic drugs may result in hemorrhagic infarction as well as the potential for incomplete revascularization and thus may lead to an increased incidence of mechanical complications compared to primary angioplasty. Accordingly, we reviewed the data of the most contemporary thrombolytic and primary angioplasty trials and compared the incidence of mechanical complications among 36,303 patients treated with thrombolytics reported in the GUSTO trial to the incidence of mechanical complications among 1,295 patients treated with primary angioplasty obtained from the PAMI-1 and PAMI-2 trials. We found that angioplasty resulted in an overall 86% relative risk reduction in mechanical complications (2.20% vs. 0.31%, P < 0.001). In comparison to thrombolytic therapy, angioplasty resulted in an 82% decrease in acute mitral regurgitation (1.73% vs. 0.31%, P < 0.001) and a 100% decrease in acute ventricular septal defect (0.47% vs. 0.00%, P < 0.03). In conclusion, in patients with acute myocardial infarction, reperfusion with primary angioplasty is associated with less myocardial rupture and mechanical complications than thrombolytics. This finding may, in part, explain the improved prognosis observed in myocardial infarction patients treated with primary angioplasty. Cathet. Cardiovasc. Diagn. 42:151–157, 1997. © 1997 Wiley-Liss, Inc.