Open Access

Influence of heart failure on the prognosis of patients with acute myocardial infarction in southwestern China

  • Authors:
    • Fuxue Deng
    • Yong Xia
    • Michael Fu
    • Yunfeng Hu
    • Fang Jia
    • Yeffry Rahardjo
    • Yingyi Duan
    • Linjing He
    • Jing Chang
  • View Affiliations

  • Published online on: March 31, 2016     https://doi.org/10.3892/etm.2016.3211
  • Pages: 2127-2138
  • Copyright: © Deng et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of Creative Commons Attribution License.

Metrics: Total Views: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )
Total PDF Downloads: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )


Abstract

The impact of heart failure (HF) on acute myocardial infarction (AMI) in patients from southwestern China remains unclear. The present study aimed to compare in‑hospital cardiovascular events, mortality and clinical therapies in AMI patients with or without HF in southwestern China. In total, 591 patients with AMI hospitalized between February 2009 and December 2012 were examined; those with a history of HF were excluded. The patients were divided into four groups according to AMI type (ST‑elevated or non‑ST‑elevated AMI) and the presence of HF during hospitalization. Clinical characteristics, in‑hospital cardiovascular events, mortality, coronary angiography and treatment were compared. Clinical therapies, specifically evidence‑based drug use were analyzed in patients with HF during hospitalization, including angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and β‑blockers (BBs). AMI patients with HF had a higher frequency of co‑morbidities, lower left ventricular ejection fraction, longer length of hospital stay and a greater risk of in‑hospital mortality compared with AMI patients without HF. AMI patients with HF were less likely to be examined by cardiac angiography or treated with reperfusion therapy or recommended medications. AMI patients with HF co‑treated with ACEIs and BBs had a significantly higher survival rate (94.4 vs. 67.5%; P<0.001) compared with untreated patients or patients treated with either ACEIs or BBs alone. Logistic regression analysis revealed that HF and cardiogenic shock in patients with AMI were the strongest predictors of in‑hospital mortality. AMI patients with HF were at a higher risk of adverse outcomes. Cardiac angiography and timely standard recommended medications were associated with improved clinical outcomes.

Introduction

Coronary artery disease (CAD) is the single most frequent cause of death worldwide; nearly 7.4 million individuals succumb to CAD every year, accounting for 13.1% of all deaths (1). Furthermore, in patients with CAD, acute myocardial infarction (AMI) is the twelfth leading cause of cardiac death (2). Each year, >3 and 4 million individuals suffer from ST-elevated myocardial infarction (STEMI) and non-ST-elevated myocardial infarction (NSTEMI), respectively (3). China is the largest of the 16 developing countries, with a rapidly developing economy; in China, ≥500,000 individuals have AMI out of a total of 2 million cardiovascular disease cases annually (4). According to research conducted by Hopkin University, ~45% of the adult population has ≥1 chronic disease; this proportion increases to 90% in individuals >65 years of age, who represent more than half of patients with myocardial infarction (5,6). Unfortunately, following AMI, neurohormonal systems that promote pathological ventricular remodeling and progressive myocardial damage are activated (7); patients consequently develop HF due to an impairment of left ventricular myocardial function (8), which is associated with high morbidity and mortality. The appropriate management of AMI, including pharmacology, thrombolysis and invasive therapy, may marginally decrease vascular complications, composite bleeding complications and mortality (9). However, treatment strategy varies with age, gender, ethnicity, clinical circumstance and socioeconomic status. In addition, ethnic differences in etiology, outcome and response to therapy in patients with HF and discrepancies in clinical practice require validation (10,11). Numerous studies have been conducted on HF rates and the beneficial clinical effects of evidence-based drug therapy have been demonstrated in western countries (12,13). Chongqing is the biggest industrial and commercial center in southwest China and is diverse in ethnicity, living standards and population (14). However, little is known with regards to the characteristics, prognosis of HF following AMI and HF medications in patients from China and other Asian countries in clinical practice. The present study aimed to compare the baseline clinical profile, clinical treatment in clinical practice, cardiovascular events and in-hospital mortality rates of AMI patients with and without HF in southwestern China.

Materials and methods

Ethics statement

The present investigation was approved by the ethics committee of the First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University (Chongqing, China). Informed consent was not obtained since this was a retrospective study and the study protocol conformed to the ethical guidelines of the Declaration of Helsinki. The patients' information was anonymized and de-identified when the data were collected and analyzed.

Study design and population

Patients who were hospitalized in the First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University due to AMI (including STEMI and NSTEMI) between February 2009 and December 2012 were recruited. Patients <18 years old, those who suffered from stable or unstable angina instead of myocardial infarction and those with a history of HF, congenital heart diseases, valvular heart diseases, cardiomyopathy, viral myocarditis, sarcoidosis, or severe arrhythmias were excluded from the study. A total of 591 patients were included in the investigation and identified according to the HF status and the type of AMI.

Data were collected retrospectively from hospital records, including clinical characteristics, initial evaluations, therapeutic management, major cardiovascular events (MACEs) and in-hospital mortality and were compared between the two groups of AMI patients. The use of the evidence-based drugs, including angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and β-blockers (BBs), in AMI patients with HF in clinical practice during hospitalization was further analyzed. Accordingly, patients were divided into two groups: Patients receiving co-treatment with BBs and ACEIs and patients either receiving no treatment or treated with BBs or ACEIs alone.

Diagnostic criteria

All 591 patients suffered from AMI on at least one occasion. AMI patients with HF during hospitalization was defined as: i) Simultaneous presentation of AMI and HF; or ii) development of HF during hospitalization for AMI in a patient with no previous history of HF due to other diseases.

According to the European Society of Cardiology, the American College of Cardiology Foundation, the American Heart Association and the World Heart Federation universal definition of AMI (2012) (15) and a previous study (16), the diagnosis of STEMI was defined by the following criteria: i) Chest pain lasting for ≥30 min that could not be completely relieved by nitrates; ii) new ST segment elevation present at the J point in two or more contiguous leads; iii) increase in serum levels of creatine kinase, creatine kinase MB (CKMB) fraction, or troponins to more than twice the upper limit of normal levels; and/or iv) evidence of diseased vessels as determined by cardiac angiography. A diagnosis of NSTEMI was accepted in the absence of ST-segment elevation, the presence of ischemic ST-segment or T-wave changes for ≥24 h with positive cardiac enzymes and/or a typical clinical presentation. Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) was diagnosed by physicians according to patient clinical respiratory symptoms (dyspnea, cough and/or sputum production), laboratory test results (including blood gas analysis and oxygen saturation) and case histories.

The diagnosis of HF in the present study was based on the following conditions, which were predominantly established from the European Society of Cardiology guideline for AMI-associated HF (17): i) Onset of cardinal manifestations of HF (such as dyspnea and fatigue); ii) rales in more than one-third of the lung field (Killip class II or higher); iii) pulmonary edema or congestion on chest radiography, with no indication of a non-cardiac cause; and/or iv) varying degrees of abnormal brain natriuretic peptide or N-terminal pro β-type natriuretic peptide levels. MACEs included atrial fibrillation, ventricular arrhythmia, major bleeding, cardiogenic shock, recurrent ischemia and recurrent myocardial infarction.

Cardiogenic shock was defined as systolic blood pressure <80 mmHg in the absence of hypovolemia and associated with cyanosis, cold extremities, changes in mental status and persistent oliguria (18). Bleeding complications were assessed by the Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction criteria and were classified as major bleeding (intracranial, overt bleeding with a >50 g/l reduction in hemoglobin levels, or hematocrit >15%) or minor bleeding (spontaneous gross hematuria or hematemesis with a >30 g/l reduction in hemoglobin levels and a <15% reduction in hematocrit) (19).

Statistical analyses

Clinical characteristic data were analyzed using χ2 tests for discrete variables and two-tailed Student's t-tests for continuous variables and were presented as the number (frequency) and mean ± standard deviation, respectively. Non-normal continuous variables were analyzed using a Mann-Whitney U-test and were presented as the median and range. In addition, logistic regression analysis was performed using a backward selection model in the following order: i) Presence of post-AMI HF; ii) risk factors such as age, gender, heart rate, smoking, drinking, diabetes, hypertension, COPD, history of angina, prior stroke, chronic renal failure, hyperlipidemia, family history of coronary artery disease, history of myocardial infarction, STEMI/NSTEMI myocardial infarction type at presentation, hospitalization, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), CKMB and length of hospital stay; iii) in-hospital events, including atrial fibrillation and ventricular arrhythmia, re-ischemia, major bleeding, re-infarction and cardiogenic shock; iv) medications during hospitalization, including antiarrhythmic, oral BBs, calcium-channel blockers, ACEIs or angiotensin receptor blockers, aspirin and heparin; and v) cardiac angiography and primary reperfusion strategies, including thrombolysis and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). As numerous variables were entered into the logistic regression model, tests for multicollinearity between variables were performed. A covariance matrix did not demonstrate significant multicollinearity and tolerance values of all variables in a linear regression model were high, indicating low multicollinearity.

Due to the limited follow-up period in this study, the entire length of hospital stay tended to correlate with several risk factors and in-hospital mortality. The in-hospital survival curve was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method and a log-rank test (Figs. 13) and χ2 test (Fig. 4) were used to compare groups. Statistical analyses were performed using SPSS software version 18.0 (SPSS, Inc., Chicago, IL, USA). P<0.05 was considered to indicate a statistically significant result for all tests.

Results

Baseline characteristics

The overall demographic and baseline characteristics of patients with or without first and new-onset HF following STEMI or NSTEMI are shown in Table I. Among the 412 STEMI and 179 NSTEMI patients, 162 (38.3%) and 60 (33.5%), respectively, developed first and new-onset HF during hospitalization. Patients with both STEMI and NSTEMI who developed in-hospital HF were significantly older and had a higher rate of renal failure (P<0.05). In addition, these patients had a higher heart rate, lower LVEF and a higher rate of arrhythmia on admission (P<0.05), and the rate of atrial fibrillation on admission was significantly higher in NSTEMI patients with HF (P<0.001). The rate of ventricular arrhythmia did not differ significantly in either STEMI and NSTEMI patients according to HF. A preserved LVEF (≥51%) was noted in 63.6% of STEMI patients and in 63.3% of NSTEMI patients who developed HF following hospitalization. However, STEMI patients with HF were more likely to have a history of COPD and a longer delay prior to hospital presentation (P<0.05). Accordingly, the peak CKMB value for STEMI patients with in-hospital HF was significantly higher compared with that for STEMI patients without HF and the peak serum creatinine and urea nitrogen values were also higher in HF patients with both AMI types. A further analysis of post-AMI HF in patients with STEMI showed that 57.4% of patients had Killip class II AMI, 17.9% had Killip class III AMI and 21.6% had Killip class IV AMI. Among the patients with NSTEMI, 70% had Killip class II AMI, 16.7% had Killip class III AMI and 13.3% had Killip class IV AMI.

Table I.

Principle characteristics of the study population evaluated according to HF and AMI status.

Table I.

Principle characteristics of the study population evaluated according to HF and AMI status.

STEMI (412 individuals) NSTEMI (179 individuals)


VariableHF (n=162, 38.3%)Non-HF (n=250, 60.7%)P-valueHF (n=60, 33.5%)Non-HF (n=119, 66.5%)P-value
Mean age (years)70.7±10.461.7±11.2   <0.00174.0±9.966.5±11.9<0.001
Men  82 (50.6)139 (55.6)0.3633 (55.0)61 (51.3)   0.750
Heart beats/min)85.5±24.676.4±17.0   <0.00185.7±21.975.9±15.9   0.001
Diabetes mellitus  34 (21.0)  59 (23.6)   0.5524 (40.0)31 (26.1)   0.060
Hypertension  81 (50.0)118 (47.2)   0.6136 (60.0)73 (61.3)   0.870
Smoking  64 (39.5)151 (60.4)   <0.00120 (33.3)49 (41.2)   0.330
Drinking  45 (27.8)100 (40.0)   0.0115 (25.0)31 (26.1)   1.000
COPD  23 (14.2)  8 (3.2)   <0.001  8 (13.3)11 (9.2)   0.440
Previous angina  47 (29.0)  92 (36.8)   0.1121 (35.0)51 (42.9)   0.340
Previous MI12 (7.4)16 (6.4)   0.69  7 (11.7)4 (3.4)   0.050
Stroke  5 (3.1)  7 (2.8)   1.005 (8.3)8 (6.7)   0.760
Chronic renal failure10 (6.2)  3 (1.2)   0.007  9 (15.0)4 (3.4)   0.010
Hyperlipidemia33 (2.4)  60 (24.0)   0.4014 (23.3)32 (26.9)   0.720
Family CAD10 (6.2)  26 (10.4)0.164 (6.7)15 (12.6)   0.310
Killip class
  II93 (57.4)42 (70.0)
  III29 (17.9)10 (16.7)
  IV35 (21.6)8 (13.3)
Arrhythmia  20 (12.3)  8 (3.2)<0.00110 (16.7)9 (7.6)   0.070
  AF16 (9.9)  4 (1.6)0.11  7 (11.7)5 (4.2)<0.001
  VA  4 (2.4)  4 (1.6)0.693 (5.0)4 (3.4)   0.720
Heart blockagea  23 (14.2)  26 (10.4)0.28  8 (13.3)13 (10.9)   0.630
Prehospital delay (h)15.1±9.612.4±9.5   0.00618.8±8.117.0±8.9   0.180
LVEF <0.001 <0.001
  ≤40%13 (8.0)  4 (1.6)   6 (10.0)4 (3.4)
  41~50%  46 (28.4)  43 (17.2) 16 (26.7)7 (5.9)
  ≥51103 (63.6)203 (81.2) 38 (63.3)108 (88.2)
Serum creatinine (µmol/l)109.6±86.480.4±22.2<0.001132.4±116.685.6±36.5<0.001
Urea nitrogen (mmol/l)   8.0±4.86.7±6.2   0.0179.8±4.96.7±6.8   0.002
CKMBb (ng/ml) and median  29.45 (0.7–500.0)  21.00 (0.4–515.0)0.047.7 (0.1–500.0)9.3 (0.1–382.8)   0.850

a Heart blockage including first-, second-, and third-degree heart blockage.

b Examined using the Mann-Whitney U-test. Numbers in parentheses are percentages and continuous variables are presented as means ± standard deviation. HF, heart failure; AF, atrial fibrillation; AMI, acute myocardial infarction; CAD, coronary artery disease; CKMB, creatine kinase MB; COPD, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; LVEF, left ventricular ejection fraction; NSTEMI, non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction; STEMI, ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction; VA, ventricular arrhythmias.

Medical treatment

The medications prescribed to patients with AMI during hospitalization are listed in Table II. Antiarrhythmic agents and HF medication (such as diuretics and digitalis) were more often prescribed to post-AMI (both STEMI and NSTEMI) HF patients. Due to contraindications (including hemorrhagic disease and stomach disease) and incomplete original medication administration records in certain cases, aspirin was prescribed and thus some data bias may exist. According to standard medical norms, all patients diagnosed with AMI should receive aspirin treatment except in cases of severe contraindications. There were no clinically significant differences in the development of post-AMI HF following the use of aspirin, BBs and ACEIs, which serve a crucial function in the prevention of cardiac remodeling and in the treatment of simultaneous HF and AMI. Therefore, the use of BBs and ACEIs in patients with or without HF was further analyzed and the results are shown in Table III. Patients with HF during hospitalization treated with both classes of medication (n=142) had a significantly higher survival rate compared with untreated patients or those treated with either class of medication alone (n=80; 94.4 vs. 67.5%; P<0.001), although the two subgroups had similar baseline characteristics. Patients with HF receiving neither BBs nor ACEIs had the lowest survival rate (Table III). However, AMI patients with HF that received both classes of recommended medication had a significantly lower survival rate compared with AMI patients without HF (P<0.001; Fig. 1).

Table II.

Medical treatment during hospitalization (n=591).

Table II.

Medical treatment during hospitalization (n=591).

STEMI NSTEMI


VariableHF (n=162)Non-HF (n=250)P-valueHF (n=60)Non-HF (n=119)P-value
Treatment
  Antiarrhythmic agents  28 (17.3)23 (9.2)   0.02013 (21.7)  3 (2.5)<0.001
  β-blockers121 (74.7)204 (81.6)   0.11054 (90.0)101 (84.9)   0.490
  CCB  38 (23.5)  53 (21.2)   0.63019 (31.7)  38 (31.9)   1.000
  ACEI/ARB116 (71.6)188 (75.2)   0.42043 (71.7)  92 (77.3)   0.460
  Diuretics126 (77.8)   37(14.8)<0.00153 (88.3)  15 (12.6)<0.001
  Digitalis  40 (24.7)  4 (1.6)<0.001  9 (15.0)  4 (3.4)   0.010
  Statin146 (90.1)240 (96.0)   0.02051 (85.0)117 (98.3)   0.001
  Aspirin147 (90.7)233 (93.2)   0.45046 (76.7)108 (90.8)   0.020
  Heparina126 (77.8)194 (77.6)   1.00040 (66.7)  93 (78.2)   0.110
  Clopidogrel156 (96.3)246 (98.4)   0.20057 (95.0)115 (96.7)   0.690
  Thrombolytic therapy  22 (13.6)  30 (12.0)   0.6501 (1.7)  3 (2.5)   1.000
Intervention
  Cardiac angiography  99 (61.1)188 (75.2)   0.00326 (43.3)  83 (69.7)   0.001
  PCI  78 (48.1)167 (66.8)<0.00118 (30.0)  65 (54.6)   0.002
TIMI flow grade at PCI 2–3  75 (96.2)  167 (100.0)  18 (100.0)  65 (100.0)
Numbers of diseased vesselsc99188   0.1702683   0.500
  One  22 (22.2)  59 (31.4)  4 (15.4)  29 (34.9)
  Two  26 (26.3)  52 (27.7)  3 (11.5)  16 (19.3)
  Three  51 (51.5)  77 (40.9)19 (73.1)  38 (45.8)
Culprit arteryb 0.23   0.350
Left anterior descending  81 (50.0)141 (56.4)29 (48.3)  62 (52.1)
  Right coronary  63 (38.9)  87 (34.8)15 (25.0)  23 (19.3)
  Circumflex16 (9.9)15 (6.0)0  5 (4.2)
  Not localized2 (1.2)  7 (2.8)16 (26.7)  29 (24.4)

a Including intravenous and subcutaneous heparin

b The diagnosis of culprit artery was conducted according to the results of percutaneous coronary intervention and electrocardiogram.

c Numbers of vessels disease were analyzed according to patients who underwent cardiac angiography. Figures in parentheses are percentages. ACEI, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor; AMI, acute myocardial infarction; ARB, angiotensin receptor blocker; CCB, calcium channel blockers; HF, heart failure; NSTEMI, non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction; PCI, percutaneous coronary intervention; STEMI, ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction.

Table III.

Comparison of post-AMI patients with HF with or without BB and ACEI treatment.

Table III.

Comparison of post-AMI patients with HF with or without BB and ACEI treatment.

VariableHF patients with both BB + ACEI (n=142)Untreated HF patients or treated with either class of drug (n=80)P-value
Mean age (years)71.5±10.771.7±9.8   0.940
Men  74 (52.1)  41 (51.3)   1.000
Diabetes mellitus  43 (30.3)  15 (18.8)   0.080
Hypertension  74 (52.1)  42 (52.5)   1.000
COPD  16 (11.3)  15 (18.8)   0.160
Previous angina  48 (33.8)  20 (25.0)   0.230
Chronic renal failure11 (7.7)  8 (10.0)   0.620
STEMI102 (71.8)  60 (75.0)   0.640
LVEF (%)51.9±9.051.9±6.7   0.950
Killip class   0.003
  II  95 (66.9)  40 (50.0)
  III  26 (18.3)  13 (16.25)
  IV  17 (11.9)  26 (32.5)
Heart beats (beats/min)85.9±22.084.9±26.9   0.750
Arrhythmia  20 (14.1)10 (12.5   0.790
  AF  16 (16.3)  7 (8.75)
  VA  4 (2.8)  3 (3.75)
Serum creatininea (µmol/l) median (range)88.0 (7.0, 732.0)98.0 (39.0, 860.0)   0.020
Urea nitrogen (mmol/l)8.23±4.949.02±4.71   0.250
CKMBa (ng/ml) median (range)19.50 (0.2, 493.1)28.90 (0.1, 500.0)   0.059
PCI  68 (47.9)  28 (35.0)   0.070
In-hospital cardiogenic shock  21 (14.8)  28 (35.0)   0.001
In-hospital mortality  8 (5.6)  26 (32.5)<0.001

{ label (or @symbol) needed for fn[@id='tfn6-etm-0-0-3211'] } Figures in parentheses are percentages.

a Serum creatinine and CKMB values were obtained using a Mann-Whitney U-test. AF, atrial fibrillation; AMI, acute myocardial infarction; ACEI, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor; BB, β-blockers; CKMB, creatine kinase MB; COPD, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; HF, heart failure; LVEF, left ventricular ejection fraction; PCI, percutaneous coronary intervention; STEMI, ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction; VA, ventricular arrhythmia.

Notably, post-AMI patients with HF were less likely to undergo cardiac angiography and PCI compared with patients without HF (P<0.05; Table II). Although there were no significant differences in culprit vessels and vessel disease, as in the case of patients with NSTEMI, patients with STEMI that developed in-hospital HF had severe right coronary stenosis, left circumflex disease, or three vessel disease.

Clinical outcomes

As shown in Table IV and Fig. 2, the in-hospital mortality rate was significantly higher in STEMI (15.4 vs. 3.3%) and NSTEMI (15 vs. 0.8%) patients with HF (P<0.001) compared with those without HF, as was the length of hospital stay. Non-fatal in-hospital outcomes such as atrial fibrillation and ventricular arrhythmia were significantly more frequent in post-AMI patients with HF (P=0.001 and P<0.001, respectively); however, there were no significant differences in the rates of recurrent ischemia, major bleeding, re-infarction or high-grade atrioventricular blockage between HF and non-HF patients. The prevalence of MACEs was higher in HF patients with either type of AMI; post-AMI HF patients with MACEs had a higher risk of in-hospital mortality compared with those without MACEs (P<0.001; Table IV; Fig. 3).

Table IV.

Clinical outcomes of the study population.

Table IV.

Clinical outcomes of the study population.

STEMI NSTEMI


VariableHF (n=162)Non-HF (n=250)P-valueHF (n=60)Non-HF (n=119)P-value
In-hospital mortality25 (15.4)  8 (3.2)<0.001  9 (15.0)1 (0.8)<0.001
Atrial fibrillation20 (12.3)  9 (3.6)   0.001  8 (13.3)3 (2.5)   0.007
Major bleeding4 (2.5)  1 (0.4)   0.08000
Ventricular arrhythmia28 (17.3)14 (5.6)<0.001  7 (11.7)9 (7.6)   0.410
Recurrent ischemia17 (10.5)17 (6.8)   0.200  7 (11.7)9 (7.6)   0.410
Re-MI2 (1.2)  4 (1.6)   1.000  2 (3.3)2 (1.7)   1.000
Cardiogenic shock40 (24.7)0  9 (15.0)0
High-grade AVB4 (2.5)  7 (2.8)   1.000  2 (3.3)4 (3.4)   1.000
MACEs82 (50.6)41 (16.4)<0.00121 (35)21 (17.6)   0.015
Hospital stay (days)12.8±9.79.4±5.3<0.00113.9±9.29.2±4.9<0.001

[i] Figures in parentheses are percentages. High AVB including second- and third-degree heart blockage. MACEs included atrial fibrillation, ventricular arrhythmia, major bleeding, cardiogenic shock, recurrent ischemia, and Re-MI. AVB, atrioventricular blockage; HF, heart failure; MACEs, major cardiovascular events; NSTEMI, non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction; Re-MI, recurrent myocardial infarction; STEMI, ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction.

Predictors of outcome

The logistic regression analysis performed to assess the effect of HF while adjusting for potential confounding factors is shown in Table V. Cardiogenic shock [odds ratio (OR), 8.21; 95% confidence interval (CI), 2.75–24.48; P<0.001] following AMI was the strongest predictor of in-hospital mortality, in addition to the onset of HF (OR, 2.88; 95% CI, 1.00–8.28; P=0.049) and age (OR, 1.07; 95% CI, 1.02–1.12; P=0.006). Similarly, in-hospital mortality rates were over two times higher in patients with Killip class III and IV AMI compared with patients with Killip class I and II AMI (Fig. 4), indicating that Killip class was associated with in-hospital mortality. Conversely, treatment with oral BBs (OR, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.61–0.92; P=0.045), treatment with ACEIs (OR, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.49–0.87; P=0.041), the CKMB value (OR, 1.003; 95% CI, 1.00–1.01; P=0.038) and length of hospital stay (OR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.87–0.99; P=0.034) were inversely correlated with in-hospital mortality. Co-treatment with BBs and ACEIs was associated with reduced mortality (OR, 0.24; 95% CI, 0.16–0.37; P<0.001). Notably, a history of COPD was inversely associated with in-hospital mortality (OR, 0.05; 95% CI, 0.00–0.67; P=0.023). The performance of cardiac angiography (OR, 0.12; 95% CI, 0.04–0.35; P<0.001) was associated with decreased in-hospital mortality. The logistic regression model demonstrated that patients with COPD in the overall AMI population had a reverse relationship with in-hospital mortality. Patients with AMI who presented with COPD were more likely to develop HF and have a higher prescription rate of diuretics and digitalis (P<0.05), but a reduced use of BBs (P<0.001; Table VI).

Table V.

Predictors of in-hospital mortality.

Table V.

Predictors of in-hospital mortality.

VariableAdjusted OR95% CIP-value
Post-AMI HF2.881.00, 8.280.049
Cardiogenic shock8.21  2.75, 24.480.000
Age1.071.02, 1.120.006
COPD0.050.00, 0.670.023
Hospitalization days0.930.87, 0.990.034
Antiarrhythmic agents4.59  1.84, 11.510.001
β-blockers0.430.61, 0.920.045
ACEIs0.410.49, 0.870.041
Co-prescriptions0.240.16, 0.370.000
Cardiac angiography0.120.04, 0.350.000
CKMB1.001.00, 1.010.038

[i] ACEIs, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors; AMI, acute myocardial infarction; CI, confidence interval; CKMB, creatine kinase MB; COPD, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; Co-prescription, co-prescription of β-blockers and ACEIs; HF, heart failure; OR, odds ratio.

Table VI.

Comparison of all AMI patients stratified according to COPD status.

Table VI.

Comparison of all AMI patients stratified according to COPD status.

VariableCOPD (n=50, 8.5%)Non-COPD (n=541, 91.5%)P-value
HF31 (62.0)191 (35.3)<0.001
Men28 (56.0)287 (53.0)0.770
Age74.2±8.1   65.7±11.9<0.001
Heart beats/min   81.4±23.7   79.6±19.80.540
Serum creatinine (µmol/l)106.4±75.4   93.7±63.60.190
Urea nitrogen (mmol/l)   8.7±6.1   7.3±5.90.090
CKMBa11.2 (1.5, 489.8)18.7 (0.1, 515.0)0.260
LVEF52.8±9.754.8±7.50.080
Hospital stay (days)10.7±6.810.8±7.40.890
STEMI31 (62.0)381 (70.4)0.260
ACEI36 (72.0)403 (74.5)0.740
β-blocker32 (64.0)448 (82.8)0.002
CCB13 (26.0)135 (24.9)0.870
Diuretics29 (58.0)202 (37.3)0.006
Digitalis10 (20.0)48 (8.7)0.020
Clopidogrel48 (96.0)526 (97.2)0.650
Aspirin45 (90.0)489 (90.4)0.810
Thrombolytic therapy1 (2)  55 (10.2)0.070
PCI19 (38.0)309 (57.1)0.010
Three-vessel disease  9 (18.0)176 (32.5)0.070
TIMI flow grade at PCI 2–318 (36.0)307 (56.7)0.160
In-hospital cardiogenic shock4 (8.0)45 (8.3)1.000

a Determined using the Mann-Whitney U-test. Figures in parentheses are percentages and continuous variables are means ± standard deviation. ACEI, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor; AMI, acute myocardial infarction; CCB, calcium channel blockers; CKMB, creatine kinase MB; COPD, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; LVEF, left ventricular ejection fraction; PCI, percutaneous coronary intervention; STEMI, ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction.

Discussion

The present study demonstrated that AMI patients with HF were at a higher risk of adverse in-hospital outcomes and had a higher incidence of MACEs compared with AMI patients without HF. In particular, in-hospital mortality was close to five-fold higher in STEMI patients with HF, as compared with that of patients without HF and even higher in NSTEMI patients with HF (15.0 vs. 0.8%). Cardiogenic shock and HF during hospitalization were strong predictors of in-hospital mortality. Medications such as BBs or ACEIs were insufficiently prescribed, although the prescription rate was higher compared with that indicated by previous studies (20,21). AMI patients with HF who received neither class of recommended medications (BBs or ACEIs) had a significantly higher risk of in-hospital mortality compared with those treated with the recommended medications. In addition, they were less likely to be examined by cardiac angiography and were treated with reperfusion therapy.

In the present study, HF occurred in 38.3% of patients with STEMI and in 33.5% of patients with NSTEMI. This incidence was similar to rates reported in western countries (32.4 and 34%, respectively) (22,23), although the Killip class in the present study was higher compared with that reported in an earlier study (24). One possible reason for the higher Killip class may be a longer pre-hospital delay compared with studies conducted in western countries (mean time, <6 h) and a longer delay in revascularization (25). A previous study demonstrated that a shorter door-to-balloon time was associated with a decline in the incidence of cardiovascular events and therefore, improved outcome following AMI (26). Furthermore, not all patients underwent immediate cardiac angiography or were taken directly to a PCI-capable center (hospitals with doctors able and qualified to perform PCI). These results were concordant with those of a previous study, in which ~50% of the patients with AMI were transferred to PCI-capable centers from an interim hospital without PCI capabilities (27). Pre-hospital system delays vary and are correlated with geographical and local factors such as urbanization and the availability of emergency medical services (28). Regardless of location (western countries or China), the time to reperfusion therapy for patients with STEMI transferred for primary PCI is often prolonged, with the guideline-recommended overall time of <90 min being achieved in only a minority of transferred patients (29). Considering the geography and traffic situation of southwestern China, the mean pre-hospital delay is unable to reach the guideline-recommended goals (30). The direct association between total ischemic time and severity of myocardial injury and mortality has been well-established for patients with STEMI (31). These results suggest that all efforts should be aimed at reducing total ischemic time to achieve improved prognosis and life expectancy.

As patients with HF are generally older and have co-morbidities, physicians may hesitate to recommend cardiac medications or procedures despite an advantageous risk-to-benefit ratio due to concerns regarding adverse effects (32). Cardiovascular drugs frequently prescribed to patients with HF were more frequently administered, except for BBs, ACEIs and aspirin. Although the utilization rate of BBs and ACEIs remained lower in patients with HF compared with AMI patients without HF during each period under study, the use of these two medications increased progressively for HF through the early 1990s (33,34). However, the issue of a persistent gap between ideal practice and the actual use of ACEIs for HF cannot be ignored. It is difficult to close this gap in the adequate use of evidence-based medications due to numerous clinical conditions or complex natural and human factors (including co-morbid illnesses, economics, geography, ethnic or racial differences and genetic factors) (10,11). Notably, the present analysis demonstrated that patients with the poorest cardiac function benefited as much as patients with better function. Data from the United States indicates that the percentage of patients receiving ACEIs or angiotensin-receptor blockers is <80% (35), whereas in western Australia, the prescription rate is 71% (36). Differences in ethnicity have been reported among these patients with HF with preserved systolic function (the BB prescription rate is 80% in Caucasians, 13.4% in African Americans, 1.0% in Asians and 0.4% in Native Americans). Another study demonstrated that African Americans with hypertension do not respond as well as Caucasians to treatment with BB, which may be due to differences in the sympathetic nervous system or in the use of drugs (37,38). According to East Asian studies, patients with HF had a better utilization rate of ACEIs (70–90%) and BBs (60–70%) (12,39), which may partly explain the lower mortality rate (2.3%, 6.6%). Patients treated with ACEIs and BBs had a lower all-cause mortality rate, lower cardiovascular mortality rate and higher long-term survival rate (33,36,40). In certain metropolitan regions of China, the utilization rates of ACEIs and BBs were ~70 and 50% among patients with HF, respectively (41,42), whereas the utilization rate of BBs was <40% in general hospitals (43) and lower in rural areas. The prescription rates of ACEIs (42.8–68.4%) (22,44) and BBs (37.7–77%) (36,45) in previous studies in other countries were lower compared with those reported in the present study (ACEIs, 71.6% and BBs, 74.7–90%), which may partly explain the higher short-term mortality rates in the previous studies (15.9–17.7%) compared with those of the present study (15–15.4%). Furthermore, the MONICA plan (Sino-MONICA project) reported that the annual morbidity and mortality of Chinese patients with cardiovascular disease are below worldwide rates and similar rates were observed in Japan, Korea and other Asian countries (46). As the first-line therapy for AMI with HF according to the European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of HF (47), treatment with ACEIs should be administered in all patients with preserved ejection fraction as rapidly as possible following HF diagnosis and maintained during the various stages, unless there is a contraindication. Oral BBs should be initiated in the first 24 h in patients with STEMI without severe contraindications. Following logistic regression, treatment with BBs or ACEIs had a beneficial effect against in-hospital mortality, whereas calcium-channel blockers did not affect in-hospital mortality (48,49). Meta-analyses of the use of ACEIs in patients with AMI and left ventricular systolic dysfunction showed a significant reduction in cardiovascular events and mortality with ACEI use. International recommendations emphasize the protective role of BBs in patients with both AMI and HF (50,51). However, further efforts are required to reduce the gap between ideal practice and the actual use of recommended medications in China due to a deficient medical system and an underdeveloped medical information system, in a country with cultural and demographic similarities and geographical and social and physical environmental differences (52). China is currently undergoing rapid socioeconomic changes further to economic reforms, particularly, increases in the gross national product, average income and personal expenditure have been reported (46). Further studies are required in order to investigate the differences between Asia and the rest of the world and to identify the most effective ways to improve the utilization rate of recommended medications that have recently become more available.

In line with the results of previous studies, the present study demonstrated that AMI patients with HF were less likely to undergo primary PCI than non-HF patients (22,23). Early revascularization has been shown to decrease infarct size, improve cardiac function and decrease the rate of cardiogenic shock. Although studies have reported the survival benefit of thrombolysis and PCI in patients with HF (53), other studies including the present one have not (54). Thrombolysis and PCI are negatively associated with in-hospital mortality in patients with HF, which may be explained by prolonged pre-hospital delay, lower reperfusion rates, associated mechanical complications (such as mitral regurgitation) or complete infarction. The limited sample size, short-term follow-up and unavoidable sample bias in the present study may have masked the positive effects of the revascularization strategy. According to the 2013 American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association guidelines for MI, primary PCI is the recommended method of reperfusion when it can be performed in a timely manner (≤90 min) by experienced operators. However, if thrombolysis therapy is indicated or selected as the primary reperfusion strategy, it should be administered within 30 min of hospital arrival (30). Similar to the results of previous studies (54,55), cardiac angiography had a positive effect on in-hospital mortality, likely due to the fact that cardiac angiography can be used to grade the complexity and extent of AMI and patients can receive relevant therapy accordingly in a timely and appropriate manner. In addition, cardiac angiography can be used to assess the requirement for revascularization therapy for lesions, the number of diseased coronary arteries and the location and calcification of the vessels that determine AMI complexity (54). However, further investigation is required to clarify whether primary PCI is superior to thrombolysis therapy for AMI patients with HF.

In the present study, the in-hospital mortality rate was 15–15.4% in the HF group, in the mid-range of previously reported in-hospital mortality rates in western countries (21.6%) (22) and China (12.3%) (56). Certain hospital-based studies in China have reported short-term mortality rates following AMI ranging from 8.1–13.1% (41,57), which was higher compared with that in South Asian and Caucasian patients. This may be partly explained by a delayed presentation to emergency departments from the onset of AMI symptoms (58). Considering the large and complex population in China, health education in cardiovascular patients as well as in healthy individuals is lacking, resulting in lack of attention in acute severe cases. In contrast to numerous studies (59,60), the logistic regression model of the present study for the overall AMI population demonstrated that COPD was inversely correlated with in-hospital mortality. AMI patients with COPD were more likely to develop HF and had higher prescription rates of diuretics and digitalis (P<0.05), but a lower BB prescription rate (P=0.002). It is plausible that in these patients with COPD, the alterations in inflammation, endothelial function and associated platelet reactivity may have destabilized the underlying coronary disease. As a result of inflammation, patients with COPD had a decreased platelet volume and an increased platelet count (61). Marked platelet inhibition may reduce cardiac adverse events in patients with COPD; however, this hypothesis requires validation (62). Another explanation may be that COPD patients suffered from chronic hypoxia, which is responsible for hemodynamic changes and the activation of the rennin-angiotensin system. Therefore, these patients with COPD may have a strong tolerance against the pathological changes of MI or HF; further studies are required to clarify the underlying mechanisms. The present cross-sectional study only assessed prognosis in terms of length of hospital stay (in-hospital mortality), which limited a long-term follow-up to determine whether the short-term and long-term prognoses of AMI patients with COPD differ. The Sino-MONICA project demonstrated that in China, cardiovascular disease mortality and risk factor levels were higher in the north and lower in the south (63). Similar to previous findings, a higher Killip class was associated with increased hospital mortality, and therefore the Killip classification serves as an accurate tool for early risk assessment of in-hospital mortality in patients with AMI (64). Although the incidence and survival rates of patients with HF have improved in the last decade (13), the association between a higher Killip class and worse prognosis has not changed.

Several limitations and strengths are noteworthy in the present study. Firstly, in an HF setting with a short hospital stay, medications could not reach the recommended level of titration. Secondly, patients with HF could not undergo cardiac angiography and rapidly receive sufficient therapy due to their poor condition. However, this study has notable strengths as well. Data from the hospital are real-case observations and were collected consecutively. With these representative data, the present investigation demonstrated how AMI was managed in daily clinical practice in southwestern China and thus demonstrate how it may be improved.

The present results demonstrated that AMI patients with HF have a higher mortality rate and are at greater risk of hospital-associated adverse outcomes compared with AMI patients without HF in Southwestern China. Guideline-recommended medications and invasive testing are used less frequently in these patients. In China, the persistent gap between ideal practice and actual use of ACEIs and BBs for HF cannot be ignored. The performance of precise diagnostic methods such as cardiac angiography and timely administration of standard recommended medications were associated with improved in-hospital mortality.

Acknowledgements

The authors of the present study are grateful to all the participating professors and students, specifically Dr Michael Fu of the Sahlgrenska University Hospital/Östra Hospital and the staff at the The First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University for their helpful cooperation. The study was supported by the National Key Clinical Specialties Construction Program of China (grant no. 170).

References

1 

World Health Organization: Cardiovascular diseases: Fact sheet 317. http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs317/en/index.htmlAccessed. March 19–2016

2 

Zhao S, Zhang Z, Long Q, Ma Y, Lian X, Yang Y, Gao W, Chen X and Wang L: Association between time of day of sports-related physical activity and the onset of acute myocardial infarction in a Chinese population. PLoS One. 11:e01464722016. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

3 

Baron T, Hambraeus K, Sundström J, Erlinge D, Jernberg T and Lindahl B: TOTAL-AMI study group: Type 2 myocardial infarction in clinical practice. Heart. 101:101–106. 2015. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

4 

Xu T, Li W, Teo K, Wang XY, Liu LS and Yusuf S: INTER-HEART China Investigators: Association of psychological risk factors and acute myocardial infarction in China: The INTER-HEART China study. Chin Med J (Engl). 124:2083–2088. 2011.PubMed/NCBI

5 

Wolff JL, Starfield B and Anderson G: Prevalence, expenditures, and complications of multiple chronic conditions in the elderly. Arch Intern Med. 162:2269–2276. 2002. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

6 

Schmidt M, Jacobsen JB, Lash TL, BØtker HE and SØrensen HT: 25 year trends in first time hospitalization for acute myocardial infarction, subsequent short and long term mortality, and the prognostic impact of sex and comorbidity: A Danish nationwide cohort study. BMJ. 344:e3562012. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

7 

Cabiddu R, Trimer R, Monteiro CI, Borghi-Silva A, Trimer V, Carvalho P, Rocha T, Paredes S, Bianchi AM and Henriques J: Correlation between autonomous function and left ventricular performance after acute myocardial infarction. Conf Proc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc. 2015:3343–3346. 2015.PubMed/NCBI

8 

Hunt SA, Abraham WT, Chin MH, Feldman AM, Francis GS, Ganiats TG, Jessup M, Konstam MA, Mancini DM, Michl K, et al: ACC/AHA 2005 guideline update for the diagnosis and management of chronic heart failure in the adult: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (Writing Committee to Update the 2001 Guidelines for the Evaluation and Management of Heart Failure). American College of Cardiology. http://www.acc.org/clinical/guidelines/failure//index.pdfAccessed. December 17–2015

9 

Greco C, Rosato S, D'Errigo P, Mureddu GF, Lacorte E and Seccareccia F: Trends in mortality and heart failure after acute myocardial infarction in Italy from 2001 to 2011. Int J Cardiol. 184:115–121. 2015. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

10 

Kramer JM, Newby LK, Chang WC, Simes RJ, Van de Werf F, Granger CB, Lee KL, White HD, Piegas LS, Topol EJ, et al: SYMPHONY and 2nd SYMPHONY Investigators: International variation in the use of evidence-based medicines for acute coronary syndromes. Eur Heart J. 24:2133–2241. 2003. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

11 

Fischbacher CM, Bhopal R, Povey C, Steiner M, Chalmers J, Mueller G, Jamieson J and Knowles D: Record linked retrospective cohort study of 4.6 million people exploring ethnic variations in disease: Myocardial infarction in South Asians. BMC Public Health. 7:1422007. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

12 

Yoo BS, Oh J, Hong BK, Shin DH, Bae JH, Yang DH, Shim WJ, Kim HS, Kim SH, Choi JO, et al: Survey of guideline adherence for treatment of systolic heart failure in real world (SUGAR): A multi-center, retrospective observational study. PLoS One. 9:e865962014. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

13 

Gjesing A, Schou M, Torp-Pedersen C, Køber L, Gustafsson F, Hildebrandt P, Videbæk L, Wiggers H, Demant M, Charlot M and Gislason GH: Patient adherence to evidence-based pharmacotherapy in systolic heart failure and the transition of follow-up from specialized heart failure outpatient clinics to primary care. Eur J Heart Fail. 15:671–678. 2013. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

14 

Chongqing Municipality Bureau of Statistics. Chongqing Statistical Yearbook 2015 (Beijing). Chines Statistics Press. 2015.

15 

Thygesen K, Alpert JS, Jaffe AS, Simoons ML, Chaitman BR and White HD: Writing Group on behalf of the Joint ESC/ACCF/AHA/WHF Task Force for the Universal Definition of Myocardial Infarction: Third universal definition of myocardial infarction. Glob Heart. 7:275–295. 2012. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

16 

Juillière Y, Cambou JP, Bataille V, Mulak G, Galinier M, Gibelin P, Benamer H, Bouvaist H, Méneveau N, Tabone X, et al: Heart failure in acute myocardial infarction: A comparison between patients with or without heart failure criteria from the FAST-MI registry. Rev Esp Cardiol (Engl Ed). 65:326–333. 2012. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

17 

Yancy CW, Jessup M, Bozkurt B, Butler J, Casey DE Jr, Drazner MH, Fonarow GC, Geraci SA, Horwich T, Januzzi JL, et al: 2013 ACCF/AHA guidelines for the management of heart failure: A report of the American college of cardiology foundation/American heart association task force on practice guideline. J Am Coll Cardilo. 62:e147–e239. 2013. View Article : Google Scholar

18 

Goldberg RJ, Spencer FA, Gore JM, Lessard D and Yarzebski J: Thirty-year trends (1975 to 2005) in the magnitude of, management of and hospital death rates associated with cardiogenic shock in patients with acute myocardial infarction: A population-based persective. Circulation. 119:1211–1219. 2009. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

19 

Pham PA, Pham PT, Pham PC, Miller JM, Pham PM and Pham SV: Implications of bleeding in acute coronary syndrome and percutaneous coronary intervention. Vasc Health Risk Manag. 7:551–567. 2011. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

20 

Andersson C, Mérie C, Jørgensen M, Gislason GH, Torp-Pedersen C, Overgaard C, Køber L, Jensen PF and Hlatky MA: Association of β-blocker therapy with risks of adverse cardiovascular events and deaths in patients with ischemic heart disease undergoing noncardiac surgery: A Danish nationwide cohort study. JAMA Intern Med. 174:336–344. 2014. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

21 

Hersi A, Alhabib KF, Alsheikh-Ali AA, Sulaiman K, Alfaleh HF, Alsaif S, Al-Mahmeed W, Asaad N, Amin H, Al-Motarreb A and Al Suwaidi J: Short-term and long-term mortality associated with ventricular arrhythmia in patients hospitalized with acute coronary syndrome: Findings from the Gulf RACE registry-2. Coron Artery Dis. 24:160–164. 2013. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

22 

McManus DD, Chinali M, Saczynski JS, Gore JM, Yarzebski J, Spencer FA, Lessard D and Goldberg RJ: 30-year trends in heart failure in patients hospitalization with acute myocardial infarction. Am J Cardiol. 107:353–359. 2011. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

23 

Kaul P, Ezekowitz JA, Armstrong PW, Leung BK, Savu A, Welsh RC, Quan H, Knudtson ML and McAlister FA: Incidence of heart failure and mortality after acute coronary syndromes. Am Heart J. 165:379–385.e2. 2013. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

24 

Gupta T, Harikrishnan P, Kolte D, Khera S, Subramanian KS, Mujib M, Masud A, Palaniswamy C, Sule S, Jain D, et al: Trends in management and outcomes of ST-elevation myocardial infarction in patients with end-stage renal disease in the United States. Am J Cariol. 115:1033–1041. 2015. View Article : Google Scholar

25 

Geng W, Tian X, Fu X, Wang P, Wang Y, Wang X, Li W and Liu X: Early routine angioplasty versus selective angioplasty after successful thrombolysis in acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. Coron Artery Dis. 24:238–243. 2013. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

26 

Poulin MF, Appis A, Purim-Shem-Tov Y, Schaer GL and Snell J: Impact of a Novel international platform and hospital design on the door-to-balloon time in patients presenting with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. Crit Pathw Cardiol. 14:39–43. 2015. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

27 

Concannon TW, Nelson J, Goetz J and Griffith JL: A percutaneous coronary intervention lab in every hospital? Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 5:14–20. 2012. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

28 

Fosbøl EL, Granger CB, Peterson ED, Lin L, Lytle BL, Shofer FS, Lohmeier C, Mears GD, Garvey JL, Corbett CC, et al: Prehospital system delay in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction care: A novel linkage of emergency medicine services and inhospital registry data. Am Heart J. 165:363–370. 2013. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

29 

Koul S, Andell P, Martinsson A, Gustav Smith J, van der Pals J, Scherstén F, Jernberg T, Lagerqvist B and Erlinge D: Delay from first medical contact to primary PCI and all-cause mortality: A nationwide study of patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction. J Am Heart Assoc. 3:e0004862014. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

30 

O'Gara PT, Kushner FG, Ascheim DD, Casey DE Jr, Chung MK, de Lemos JA, Ettinger SM, Fang JC, Fesmire FM, Franklin BA, et al: CF/AHA Task Force: 2013 ACCF/AHA guideline for the management of ST-elevation myocardial infarction: executive summary: A report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines. Circulation. 127:529–555. 2013. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

31 

Minha S, Loh JP, Satler LF, Pendyala LK, Barbash IM, Magalhaes MA, Suddath WO, Pichard AD, Torguson R and Waksman R: Transfer distance effect on reperfusion: Timeline of ST-elevation patients transferred for primary percutanenous coronary intervention. Cardiovasc Revasc Med. 15:369–374. 2014. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

32 

Lazzarini V, Mentz RJ, Fiuzat M, Metra M and O'Connor CM: Heart failure in elderly patients: Distinctive features and unresolved issue. Eur J Heart Fail. 15:717–723. 2013. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

33 

Ong HT, Ong LM and Ho JJ: Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and angiotensin-receptor blockers (ARBs) in patients at high risk of cardiovascular events: A meta-analysis of 10 randomized placebo-controlled trials. ISRN Cardiol. 2013:4785972013. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

34 

Hernandez AF, Hammill BG, O'Connor CM, Schulman KA, Curtis LH and Fonarow GC: Clinical effectiveness of beta-blockers in heart failure: Findings from the OPTIMIZE-HF (organized program to initiate lifesaving treatment in hospitalized patients with heart failure) registry. J Am Coll Cardiol. 53:184–192. 2009. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

35 

Eschalier R, Chenaf C, Mulliez A, Yalioua A, Clerfond G, Authier N, Vorilhon C, Citron B, Pereira B, Jean F, et al: Impact of clinical characteristics and management on the prognosis of unselected heart failure patients. Cardiovasc Drugs Ther. 29:89–98. 2015. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

36 

Hung J, Teng TH, Finn J, Knuiman M, Briffa T, Stewart S, Sanfilippo FM, Ridout S and Hobbs M: Trends from 1996 to 2007 in incidence and mortality outcomes of heart failure after acute myocardial infarction: A population-based study of 20, 812 patients with first acute myocardial infarction in Western Australia. J Am Heart Assoc. 2:e0001722013. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

37 

Materson BJ, Reda DJ, Cushman WC, Massie BM, Freis ED, Kochar MS, Hamburger RJ, Fye C, Lakshman R, Gottdiener J, et al: The Department of Veterans Affairs Cooperative Study Group on Antihypertensive Agents: Single-drug therapy for hypertension in men: A comparison of six antihypertensive agents with placebo. N Engl J Med. 328:914–921. 1993. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

38 

Prisant LM and Mensah GA: Use of beta-adrenergic receptor blockers in blacks. J Clin Pharmacol. 36:867–873. 1996. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

39 

Youn YJ, Yoo BS, Lee JW, Kim JY, Han SW, Jeon ES, Cho MC, Kim JJ, Kang SM, Chae SC, et al: KorHF Registry: Treatment performance measures affect clinical outcomes in patients with acute systolic heart failure. Circ J. 76:1151–1158. 2012. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

40 

Gomez-Soto FM, Romero SP, Bernal JA, Escobar MA, Puerto JL, Andrey JL, Almenara J and Gomez F: Mortality and morbidity of non-systolic heart failure treated with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors: A propensity-adjusted case-control study. Int J Cardiol. 139:276–282. 2010. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

41 

Guo S, Yang Z, Wu D, Yang C, Tao Y, Chen F, Su W, Zheng R, Yang S, Li X and Chen J: A multi-centre survey on the therapeutic status of patients with acute myocardial infarction in Wuxi city of China. Zhonghua Xin Xue Guan Bing Za Zhi. 42:309–313. 2014.PubMed/NCBI

42 

Lai EJ, Grubisic M, Palepu A, Quan H, King KM and Khan NA: Cardiac medication prescribing and adherence after acute myocardial infarction in Chinese and South Asian Canadian patients. BMC Cardiovasc Disord. 11:562011. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

43 

Jiang H and Ge J: Epidemiology and clinical management of cardiomyopathies and heart failure in China. Heart. 95:1727–1731. 2009. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

44 

Teo KK, Liu L, Chow CK, Wang X, Islam S, Jiang L, Sanderson JE, Rangarajan S and Yusuf S: INTERHEART Investigators in China: Potential modifiable risk factors associated with myocardial infarction in China: The INTERHEART China study. Heart. 95:1857–1864. 2009. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

45 

Doughty RN, Rodgers A, Sharpe N and MacMahon S: Effects of beta-blocker therapy on mortality in patients with heart failure: A systematic overview of randomized controlled trails. Eur Heart J. 18:560–565. 1997. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

46 

Yang ZJ, Liu J, Ge JP, Chen L, Zhao ZG and Yang WY: China National Diabetes and Metabolic Disorders Study Group: Prevalence of cardiovascular disease risk factor in the Chinese population: The 2007–2008 China National Diabetes and Metabolic Disorders Study. Eur Heart J. 33:213–220. 2012. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

47 

McMurray JJ, Adamopoulos S, Anker SD, Auricchio A, Böhm M, Dickstein K, Falk V, Filippatos G, Fonseca C, Gomez-Sanchez MA, et al: ESC Committee for Practice Guidelines: ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of acute and chronic heart failure 2012: The Task Force for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Acute and Chronic Heart Failure 2012 of the European Society of Cardiology. Developed in collaboration with the Heart Failure Association (HFA) of the ESC. Eur Heart J. 33:1787–1847. 2012. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

48 

Strauss MH and Hall AS: The divergent cardiaovascular effects of angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers on myocardial infarction and death. Prog Cardiovasc Dis. Nov 14–2015.(Epub ahead of print). View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

49 

Xie W, Zheng F, Song X, Zhong B and Yan L: Renni-angiotensin-aldosterone system blockers for heart failure with reduced ejection fraction or left ventricular dysfunction: Network meta-analysis. Int J Cardiol. 205:65–71. 2016. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

50 

Swedberg K, Cleland J, Dargie H, Drexler H, Follath F, Komajda M, Tavazzi L, Smiseth OA, Gavazzi A, Haverich A, et al: Task Force for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Chronic Heart Failure of the European Society of Cardiology: Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of chronic heart failure: Executive summary (update 2005): The Task Force for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Chronic Heart Failure of the European Society of Cardiology. Eur Heart J. 26:1115–1140. 2005. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

51 

Van de Werf F, Ardissino D, Betriu A, Cokkinos DV, Falk E, Fox KA, Julian D, Lengyel M, Neumann FJ, Ruzyllo W, et al: Task Force on the Management of Acute Myocardial Infarction of the European Society of Cardiology: Management of acute myocardial infarction in patients presenting with ST-segment elevation. Eur Heart J. 24:28–66. 2003. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

52 

Dang H, Wang Q, Wang H, Yan M and Liu X: The integration of Chinese material medica into the Chinese Health Care Delivery System, an update. Phytother Res. 30:292–297. 2016. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

53 

Huynh T, Perron S, O'Loughlin J, Joseph L, Labrecque M, Tu JV and Théroux P: Comparison of primary percutaneous coronary intervention and fibrinolytic therapy in ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction: Bayesian hierarchical meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials and observational studies. Circulation. 119:3101–3109. 2009. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

54 

Harjola VP, Follath F, Nieminen MS, Brutsaert D, Dickstein K, Drexler H, Hochadel M, Komajda M, Lopez-Sendon JL, Ponikowski P and Tavazzi L: Characteristics, outcomes and predictors of mortality at 3 months and 1 year in patients hospitalized for acute heart failure. Eur J Heart Fail. 12:239–248. 2010. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

55 

Goldberg RJ, Samad NA, Yarzebski J, Gurwitz J, Bigelow C and Gore JM: Temporal trends in cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med. 340:1162–1168. 1999. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

56 

Khan NA, Grubisic M, Hemmelgarn B, Humphries K, King KM and Quan H: Outcomes after acute myocardial infarction in South Asia, Chinese, and white patients. Circulation. 122:1570–1577. 2010. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

57 

Zhou L, Honma T and Kaku N: Comparison of incidence, mortality and treatment of acute myocardial infarction in hospitals in Japan and China. Kurume Med J. 39:279–284. 1992. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

58 

Jones DA, Gallagher S, Rathod KS, Redwood S, de Belder MA, Mathur A, Timmis AD, Ludman PF, Townend JN and Wragg A: NICOR (National Institute for Cardiovascular Outcomes Research): Mortality in South Asians and Caucasians after percutaneous coronary intervention in the United Kingdom: An observational cohort study of 279, 256 patients from the BCIS (British cardiovascular intervention society) national database. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 7:362–371. 2014. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

59 

Campo G, Guastaroba P, Marzocchi A, Santarelli A, Varani E, Vignali L, Sangiorgio P, Tondi S, Serenelli C, De Palma R and Saia F: Impact of COPD on long-term outcome after ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction receiving primary percutaneous coronary intervention. Chest. 144:750–757. 2013. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

60 

Vestbo J, Hurd SS, Agustí AG, Jones PW, Vogelmeier C, Anzueto A, Barnes PJ, Fabbri LM, Martinez FJ, Nishimura M, et al: Global stragegy for the diagnosis, management and prevention of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: GOLD executive summary. Am J Respir Cirt Care Med. 187:347–365. 2013. View Article : Google Scholar

61 

Wang RT, Li JY, Cao ZG and Li Y: Mean platelet volume is decreased during an acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Respirology. 18:1244–1248. 2013. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

62 

Campo G, Pavasini R, Malagù M, Punzetti S, Napoli N, Guerzoni F, Papi A, Ceconi C and Contoli M: Relationship between troponin elevation, cardiovascular history and adverse events in patients with acute exacerbation of COPD. COPD. 12:560–567. 2015. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

63 

Wu Z, Yao C, Zhao D, Wu G, Wang W, Liu J, Zheng Z and Wu Y: Sino-MONICA project: A collaborative study on trends and determinants in cardiovascular diseases in China, Part i: Morbidity and mortality monitoring. Circulation. 103:462–468. 2001. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

64 

Mello BH, Oliveira GB, Ramos RF, Lopes BB, Barros CB, Carvalho Ede O, Teixeira FB, Arruda GD, Revelo MS and Piegas LS: Validation of the Killip-Kimball classification and late mortality after acute myocardial infarction. Arq Bras Cardiol. 103:107–117. 2014.(In English and Portuguese). PubMed/NCBI

Related Articles

Journal Cover

June-2016
Volume 11 Issue 6

Print ISSN: 1792-0981
Online ISSN:1792-1015

Sign up for eToc alerts

Recommend to Library

Copy and paste a formatted citation
x
Spandidos Publications style
Deng F, Xia Y, Fu M, Hu Y, Jia F, Rahardjo Y, Duan Y, He L and Chang J: Influence of heart failure on the prognosis of patients with acute myocardial infarction in southwestern China. Exp Ther Med 11: 2127-2138, 2016
APA
Deng, F., Xia, Y., Fu, M., Hu, Y., Jia, F., Rahardjo, Y. ... Chang, J. (2016). Influence of heart failure on the prognosis of patients with acute myocardial infarction in southwestern China. Experimental and Therapeutic Medicine, 11, 2127-2138. https://doi.org/10.3892/etm.2016.3211
MLA
Deng, F., Xia, Y., Fu, M., Hu, Y., Jia, F., Rahardjo, Y., Duan, Y., He, L., Chang, J."Influence of heart failure on the prognosis of patients with acute myocardial infarction in southwestern China". Experimental and Therapeutic Medicine 11.6 (2016): 2127-2138.
Chicago
Deng, F., Xia, Y., Fu, M., Hu, Y., Jia, F., Rahardjo, Y., Duan, Y., He, L., Chang, J."Influence of heart failure on the prognosis of patients with acute myocardial infarction in southwestern China". Experimental and Therapeutic Medicine 11, no. 6 (2016): 2127-2138. https://doi.org/10.3892/etm.2016.3211