A retrospective study of an invasive versus conservative strategy in patients aged ≥80 years with acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction

一项回顾性研究比较了年龄≥80岁的急性ST段抬高型心肌梗死患者的介入治疗策略与保守治疗策略

阅读:1

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To investigate what is the most appropriate strategy for patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) aged ≥80 years in China. METHODS: This cohort study retrospectively enrolled patients with STEMI aged ≥80 years old and grouped them according to the treatment strategy that was used: a conservative treatment strategy or an invasive treatment strategy. Factors associated with whether to perform an invasive intervention, in-hospital death and a good prognosis were investigated using logistic regression analyses. RESULTS: A total of 232 patients were enrolled: conservative treatment group (n = 93) and invasive treatment group (n = 139). Patients in the invasive treatment group had a better prognosis and lower incidence of adverse events compared with the conservative treatment group. Advanced age, creatinine level and a higher Killip class were inversely correlated with whether to perform an invasive intervention, while the use of beta-receptor-blocking agents was a favourable factor for invasive treatment. Hypertension and a higher Killip class were risk factors for in-hospital death, while the use of beta-receptor-blocking agents and diuretics decreased the risk of in-hospital death. CONCLUSIONS: An invasive treatment strategy was superior to a conservative treatment strategy in patients with STEMI aged ≥80 years.

特别声明

1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。

2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。

3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。

4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。