Cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction in elderly patients: Does admission to a tertiary center improve survival?☆☆☆
Abstract
Background The role of early revascularization among patients with acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock remains controversial. Angioplasty registries, while suggesting a benefit, are subject to selection bias, and clinical trials have been underpowered to detect early benefits. If an invasive strategy is beneficial in this population, patients admitted to hospitals with onsite coronary revascularization might be expected to have a better prognosis. We sought to determine whether access to cardiovascular resources at the admitting hospital influenced the prognosis of patients with acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock. Methods By use of the Cooperative Cardiovascular Project database (a retrospective medical record review of Medicare patients discharged with acute myocardial infarction), we identified patients aged ≥65 years whose myocardial infarction was complicated by cardiogenic shock. Results Of the 601 patients with cardiogenic shock, 287 (47.8%) were admitted to hospitals without revascularization services and 314 (52.2%) were admitted to hospitals with coronary angioplasty and coronary artery bypass surgery facilities. Clinical characteristics were similar across the subgroups. Patients admitted to hospitals with revascularization services were more likely to undergo coronary revascularization during the index hospitalization and during the first month after acute myocardial infarction. After adjustment for demographic, clinical, hospital, and treatment strategies, the presence of onsite revascularization services was not associated with a significantly lower 30-day (odds ratio 0.83, 95% CI 0.47, 1.45) or 1-year mortality (odds ratio 0.91, 95% CI 0.49, 1.72). Conclusions In a community-based cohort, patients with acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock did not have significantly different adjusted 30-day and 1-year mortality, irrespective of the revascularization capabilities of the admitting hospital. (Am Heart J 2002;143:768-76.)
To access this article, please choose from the options below
☆ The analyses upon which this publication is based were performed under Contract No. 500-96-P549, entitled “Utilization and quality control peer review organization for the state of Connecticut,” sponsored by the Health Care Financing Administration, Department of Health and Human Services. The content of this publication does not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the Department of Health and Human Services, nor does mention of trade names, commercial products, or organizations imply endorsement by the US government. The author assumes full responsibility for the accuracy and completeness of the ideas presented. This article is a direct result of the Health Care Quality Improvement Program initiated by the Health Care Financing Administration, which has encouraged identification of quality improvement projects derived from analysis of patterns of care and therefore required no special funding on the part of this contractor. Ideas and contributions to the author concerning experience in engaging with issues presented are welcomed.
☆☆ Reprint requests: Harlan M. Krumholz, MD, Yale University School of Medicine, 333 Cedar St, PO Box 208025, New Haven, CT 06520-8025.
PII: S0002-8703(02)59714-3
doi:10.1067/mhj.2002.122289
© 2002 Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.
