Where do we stand with acute myocardial infarction patients with severely reduced left ventricular ejection fraction? insights from AMIS Plus Registry

Abstract

Abstract Background Left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) represents one of the strongest predictors of both in-hospital and long-term prognosis in acute myocardial infarction (AMI). Temporal trends data coming from real-word experiences focused on AMI patients with severely reduced LVEF (i.e. <30%) are lacking. Purpose The present study aims at providing a comprehensive picture on temporal trends in AMI patients with severely reduced LVEF, with a particular focus on prevalence, in-hospital management/prognosis and pharmacological therapy at discharge. These data could shed light on the implementation in the clinical arena of guideline-directed therapies in this fragile subgroup of patients and on their effect on real-word short-term prognosis. Methods On a total of 48,543 screened AMI patients included in AMIS Plus Registry between 2005 and 2020, data on LVEF were available for 23,510 patients. Study patients were classified according to LVEF as AMI patients with or without severely reduced LVEF (i.e. patients with LVEF <30% and ≤30%, respectively). Results Overall, 1657 AMI patients (7%) presented with severely reduced LVEF. Prevalence of severe LVEF reduction constantly decreased over the study period (from 11% to 4%, p<0.001; Figure 1). In the subgroup of patients with severely reduced LVEF a significant increase in revascularisation (percutaneous and/or surgical) rate was observed (from 61% to 84%, p<0.001); in-hospital access to advanced short-term mechanical circulatory support (both ECMO and/or Impella) significantly increased from 0% in 2011 to 17% (p=0.05). Rate of cardiogenic shock developed during hospitalization remained stable over time (from 21% to 16%, p=0.7); in-hospital mortality did not significantly decrease and remained well above 20% all over the study period (from 23% to 26%, p=0.65; Figure 2). At discharge, prescription of optimal anti-ischaemic therapy (defined as an association of dual antiplatelet therapy and statine) significantly increased (from 47% to 75%, p<0.001), mainly driven by an increase in dual antiplatelet therapy prescription; however, prescription of optimal cardio-protective therapy (defined as an association of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone-system inhibitors, beta-blocker and mineralcorticoid receptor antagonist) remained low across the study period (from 17% in 2011 to 20%, p=0.96). Conclusion AMI patients with severely reduced ejection fraction still remain a fragile subgroup of patients; in-hospital mortality did not significantly decrease and remained exceedingly high and well above 20% all over the study period; efforts are, therefore, urgently needed to develop therapeutic strategies focused on this subgroup of patients and aiming at improving short-term prognosis. Moreover, access at discharge to optimal cardio-protective therapy remains suboptimal; efforts are needed to improve access to guidelines-directed therapy both at discharge and follow-up in this fragile population. Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding sources: Other. Main funding source(s): Swiss Heart Fundation