Appropriate secondary prevention and clinical outcomes after acute myocardial infarction according to atherothrombotic risk stratification: The FAST-MI 2010 registry

Abstract

Background

Full secondary prevention medication regimen is often under-prescribed after acute myocardial infarction.

Design

The purpose of this study was to analyse the relationship between prescription of appropriate secondary prevention treatment at discharge and long-term clinical outcomes according to risk level defined by the Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) Risk Score for Secondary Prevention (TRS-2P) after acute myocardial infarction.

Methods

We used data from the 2010 French Registry of Acute ST-Elevation or non-ST-elevation Myocardial Infarction (FAST-MI) registry, including 4169 consecutive acute myocardial infarction patients admitted to cardiac intensive care units in France. Level of risk was stratified in three groups using the TRS-2P score: group 1 (low-risk; TRS-2P=0/1); group 2 (intermediate-risk; TRS-2P=2); and group 3 (high-risk; TRS-2P≥3). Appropriate secondary prevention treatment was defined according to the latest guidelines (dual antiplatelet therapy and moderate/high dose statins for all; new-P2Y12 inhibitors, angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin-receptor-blockers and beta-blockers as indicated).

Results

Prevalence of groups 1, 2 and 3 was 46%, 25% and 29% respectively. Appropriate secondary prevention treatment at discharge was used in 39.5%, 37% and 28% of each group, respectively. After multivariate adjustment, evidence-based treatments at discharge were associated with lower rates of major adverse cardiovascular events (death, re-myocardial infarction or stroke) at five years especially in high-risk patients: hazard ratio = 0.82 (95% confidence interval: 0.59–1.12, p = 0.21) in group 1, 0.74 (0.54–1.01; p = 0.06) in group 2, and 0.64 (0.52–0.79, p < 0.001) in group 3.

Conclusions

Use of appropriate secondary prevention treatment at discharge was inversely correlated with patient risk. The increased hazard related to lack of prescription of recommended medications was much larger in high-risk patients. Specific efforts should be directed at better prescription of recommended treatment, particularly in high-risk patients.

Keywords

Acute myocardial infarction prevention mortality score

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Roffi

Patrono

Collet

et al.

ESC Scientific Document Group. 2015 ESC Guidelines for the management of acute coronary syndromes in patients presenting without persistent ST-segment elevation: Task Force for the Management of Acute Coronary Syndromes in Patients Presenting without Persistent ST-Segment Elevation of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC). Eur Heart J 2016; 37: 267–315.

Ibanez

James

Agewall

et al.

ESC Scientific Document Group. 2017 ESC Guidelines for the management of acute myocardial infarction in patients presenting with ST-segment elevation: The Task Force for the management of acute myocardial infarction in patients presenting with ST-segment elevation of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC). Eur Heart J 2018; 39: 119–177.

Antman

Cohen

Bernink

et al.

The TIMI risk score for unstable angina/non-ST elevation MI: A method for prognostication and therapeutic decision making. JAMA 2000; 284: 835–842.

Morrow

Antman

Charlesworth

et al.

TIMI risk score for ST-elevation myocardial infarction: A convenient, bedside, clinical score for risk assessment at presentation: An intravenous nPA for treatment of infarcting myocardium early II trial substudy. Circulation 2000; 102: 2031–2037.

Granger

Goldberg

Dabbous

et al.

Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events Investigators. Predictors of hospital mortality in the global registry of acute coronary events. Arch Intern Med 2003; 163: 2345–2353.

Huynh

Kouz

Yan

et al.

Canada Acute Coronary Syndrome Risk Score: A new risk score for early prognostication in acute coronary syndromes. Am Heart J 2013; 166: 58–63.

Fox

Fitzgerald

Puymirat

et al.

Should patients with acute coronary disease be stratified for management according to their risk? Derivation, external validation and outcomes using the updated GRACE risk score. BMJ Open 2014; 4: e004425–e004425.

Schmidt

Jacobsen

Lash

et al.

25 year trends in first time hospitalisation for acute myocardial infarction, subsequent short and long term mortality, and the prognostic impact of sex and comorbidity: A Danish nationwide cohort study. BMJ 2012; 344: e356–e356.

Fox

Carruthers

Dunbar

et al.

Underestimated and underrecognized: The late consequences of acute coronary syndrome (GRACE UK Belgian Study). Eur Heart J 2010; 31: 2755–2764.

10.

Yeh

Sidney

Chandra

et al.

Population trends in the incidence and outcomes of acute myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med 2010; 362: 2155–2165.

11.

Morrow

. Cardiovascular risk prediction in patients with stable and unstable coronary heart disease. Circulation 2010; 121: 2681–2691.

12.

Antoni

Hoogslag

Boden

et al.

Cardiovascular mortality and heart failure risk score for patients after ST-segment elevation acute myocardial infarction treated with primary percutaneous coronary intervention (Data from the Leiden MISSION! Infarct Registry). Am J Cardiol 2012; 109: 187–194.

13.

Battes

Barendse

Steyerberg

et al.

Development and validation of a cardiovascular risk assessment model in patients with established coronary artery disease. Am J Cardiol 2013; 112: 27–33.

14.

Bavry

Kumbhani

Gong

et al.

Simple integer risk score to determine prognosis of patients with hypertension and chronic stable coronary artery disease. J Am Heart Assoc 2013; 2: e000205–e000205.

15.

Goliasch

Kleber

Richter

et al.

Routinely available biomarkers improve prediction of long-term mortality in stable coronary artery disease: The Vienna and Ludwigshafen Coronary Artery Disease (VILCAD) risk score. Eur Heart J 2012; 33: 2282–2289.

16.

Plakht

Shiyovich

Weitzman

et al.

Acute myocardial infarction (SAMI) score predicting 10-year mortality following acute myocardial infarction. Int J Cardiol 2013; 167: 3068–3070.

17.

Plakht

Shiyovich

Weitzman

et al.

A new risk score predicting 1- and 5-year mortality following acute myocardial infarction Soroka Acute Myocardial Infarction (SAMI) Project. Int J Cardiol 2012; 154: 173–179.

18.

Wilson

D'Agostino

Sr Bhatt

et al.

An international model to predict recurrent cardiovascular disease. Am J Med 2012; 125: 695–703.

19.

Beatty

Bibbins-Domingo

et al.

Traditional risk factors versus biomarkers for prediction of secondary events in patients with stable coronary heart disease: From the Heart and Soul Study. J Am Heart Assoc 2015; 4: e001646–e001646.

20.

Yap

Duong

Bland

et al.

Potential demographic and baselines variables for risk stratification of high-risk post-myocardial infarction patients in the era of implantable cardioverter-defibrillatorea prognostic indicator. Int J Cardiol 2008; 126: 101–107.

21.

Bohula

Bonaca

Braunwald

et al.

Atherothrombotic risk stratification and the efficacy and safety of vorapaxar in patients with stable ischemic heart disease and previous myocardial infarction. Circulation 2016; 134: 304–313.

22.

Morrow

Braunwald

Bonaca

et al.

TRA 2P-TIMI 50 Steering Committee and Investigators. Vorapaxar in the secondary prevention of atherothrombotic events. N Engl J Med 2012; 366: 1404–1413.

23.

Scirica

Bonaca

Braunwald

et al.

TRA 2°P-TIMI 50 Steering Committee Investigators. Vorapaxar for secondary prevention of thrombotic events for patients with previous myocardial infarction: A prespecified subgroup analysis of the TRA 2°P-TIMI 50 trial. Lancet 2012; 380: 1317–1324.

24.

Bohula

Morrow

Giugliano

et al.

Atherothrombotic risk stratification and ezetimibe for secondary prevention. J Am Coll Cardiol 2017; 69: 911–921.

25.

Williams

Chagin

Bash

et al.

External validation of the TIMI risk score for secondary cardiovascular events among patients with recent myocardial infarction. Atherosclerosis 2018; 272: 80–86.

26.

Hanssen

Cottin

Khalife

et al.

FAST-MI 2010 Investigators. French Registry on Acute ST-elevation and non ST-elevation Myocardial Infarction 2010. FAST-MI 2010. Heart Br Card Soc 2012; 98: 699–705.

27.

Valgimigli

Bueno

Byrne

et al.

ESC Scientific Document Group; ESC Committee for Practice Guidelines (CPG); ESC National Cardiac Societies. 2017 ESC focused update on dual antiplatelet therapy in coronary artery disease developed in collaboration with EACTS: The Task Force for dual antiplatelet therapy in coronary artery disease of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and of the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS). Eur Heart J 2018; 39: 213–260.

28.

Costa

van Klaveren

James

et al.

Derivation and validation of the predicting bleeding complications in patients undergoing stent implantation and subsequent dual antiplatelet therapy (PRECISE-DAPT) score: A pooled analysis of individual-patient datasets from clinical trials. Lancet 2017; 389: 1025–1034.

29.

Schiele

Meneveau

Seronde

et al.

Compliance with guidelines and 1-year mortality in patients with acute myocardial infarction: A prospective study; Réseau de Cardiologie de Franche Comté group. Eur Heart J 2005; 26: 873–880.

30.

Scott

IA1

Derhy

O'Kane

et al.

CPIC cardiac collaborative discordance between level of risk and intensity of evidence-based treatment in patients with acute coronary syndromes. Med J Aust 2007; 187: 153–159.

31.

Vernon

Coffey

Bhindi

et al.

Increasing proportion of ST elevation myocardial infarction patients with coronary atherosclerosis poorly explained by standard modifiable risk factors. Eur J Prev Cardiol 2017; 24: 1824–1830.

32.

Schiele

Ecarnot

Chopard

. Coronary artery disease: Risk stratification and patient selection for more aggressive secondary prevention. Eur J Prev Cardiol 2017; 24: 88–100.

33.

Cheng

Zhang

Mei

. The impact of medication adherence on clinical outcomes of coronary artery disease: A meta-analysis. Eur J Prev Cardiol 2017; 24: 962–970.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.59 MB