In-hospital Major Bleeding Events Research Articles

External validation of the SWEDEHEART score for predicting in-hospital major bleeding among East Asian patients with acute myocardial infarction.

Risk scores for predicting in-hospital major bleeding in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) are rare. The Swedish web-system for the enhancement and development of evidence-based care in heart disease evaluated according to recommended therapies (SWEDEHEART) score (SS), consisting of five common clinical variables, is a novel model for predicting in-hospital major bleeding. External validation of SS has not yet been completed. A retrospective study recruiting consecutive East Asian patients diagnosed with AMI was conducted in the Second Affiliated Hospital, Zhejiang University. The primary endpoint was the ability of SS to predict in-hospital major bleeding, which was defined as Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) type 3 or 5 bleeding. To validate SS, the discrimination and calibration were assessed in the overall population and several subgroups. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves and the areas under ROC curves (AUCs) were calculated for discrimination. The calibration of SS was evaluated with the unreliability U test. A total of 2,841 patients diagnosed with AMI during hospitalization were included, and 1.94% (55) of them experienced in-hospital major bleeding events. The AUC of SS for the whole population was only 0.60 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.52-0.67], without an acceptable calibration (p = 0.001). Meanwhile, the highest AUC (0.72; 95% CI, 0.61-0.82) of SS for the primary endpoint was found in the diabetes subgroup, with an acceptable calibration (p = 0.87). This external validation study showed that SS failed to exhibit sufficient accuracy in predicting in-hospital major bleeding among East Asian patients with AMI despite demonstrating acceptable performance in the diabetic subgroup of patients. Studies to uncover optimal prediction tools for in-hospital major bleeding risk in AMI are urgently warranted.

Acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction: are men and women particular cases of STEMI ?

Abstract Funding Acknowledgements Type of funding sources: None. Background ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) has high levels of morbidity and mortality. Multiple risk factors may contribute to clinical outcomes and some studies demonstrate gender-related differences in baseline characteristics and in-hospital management. Purpose To access the difference in clinical characteristics and prognostic outcomes between men and women who were admitted in our Cardiac Intensive Care Unit with STEMI diagnosis. Methods We retrospectively analyzed 121 non-consecutive patients with STEMI during a mean follow-up period 135 ± 31 weeks. We accessed baseline characteristics and time course of events (symptom onset-to-door admission; time to first EKG; time to fibrinolytic therapy; door-to-cath lab time and time from fibrinolytic therapy to PCI (for patients transferred from another centers). Primary endpoint (PE) was a composite of in-hospital cardiovascular death, arrhythmic events or STEMI evolution in Killip-Kimbal III or IV. Secondary endpoint (SE) was in-hospital major bleeding events, considered intracerebral hemorrhage, cases of hemodynamic compromise or requiring a blood transfusion. Tertiary endpoint (TE) included admissions to the emergency department or hospitalization by heart failure decompensation, acute or chronic coronary syndromes and all-cause mortality. Results Of the 121 patients, 102 were male (84.3%) and 19 (15.7%) female. The mean age was 58.3 ± 12.7 years and women had a superior mean age (69.8 ± 12.2 years) vs. Men mean age 56 ± 11.6 years. Hypertension was more prevalent in women (84.2% vs. 47.1%, respectively; p 0.003) and also diabetes – 36.8% of women had type 2 diabetes (vs 10.8% of men) and 5.3% of these female patients requires insulin therapy (vs 2% of men; p 0.021). According to Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI), women had a higher disease burden with 73.7% of them included into the moderate or severe group of mortality risk, compared to 42.2% of men (p 0.014). Conversely, less women smoke (31.6% vs. 82.2%; p <0.001) and less frequently chest pain was the onset symptom (78.9% vs. 95.1%; p 0.04). Time since symptom onset to door admission was estimated on 510 ± 1149 minutes and the mean women delay was superior (557 ± 858 minutes). Regarding to in-hospital hemorrhagic events (secondary endpoint), female patients had a statistically significant higher risk (22.2% vs. 7.1%, p 0.045), independently of hypertension, diabetes or anticoagulant therapy (r=0.249; ANOVA p-value < 0.005), but it was associated with higher CCI (p 0.033). No other gender differences in outcomes or survival function were observed. Conclusion Our study demonstrates gender-related differences among patients with STEMI. Indeed, women were older, had more clinical cardiovascular risk factors and tend to delay hospital admission after symptoms onset. Secondary endpoint was statistically more frequent in women, but no other differences in outcomes were observed.

ACUTE ST-ELEVATION MYOCARDIAL INFARCTION: ARE MEN AND WOMEN PARTICULAR CASES OF STEMI?

Objective: To access the difference in clinical characteristics and prognostic outcomes between men and women who were admitted in our Cardiac Intensive Care Unit with STEMI diagnosis. Design and method: We retrospectively analyzed 121 patients with STEMI, during a mean follow-up period 135 ± 31 weeks. We accessed baseline characteristics and time course of events. Primary endpoint (PE) was a composite of in-hospital cardiovascular death, arrhythmic events or STEMI evolution in Killip-Kimbal III or IV. Secondary endpoint (SE) was in-hospital major bleeding events and tertiary endpoint (TE) included admissions to the emergency department or hospitalization by heart failure decompensation, acute or chronic coronary syndromes and all-cause mortality. Results: Of the 121 patients, 102 were male (84.3%). The mean age was 58.3 ± 12.7 years and women had a superior mean age (69.8 ± 12.2 years). Hypertension was more prevalent in women (84.2% vs. 47.1%, respectively; p 0.003) and also diabetes – 36.8% of women had type 2 diabetes and 5.3% of these female patients requires insulin therapy (vs 2% of men; p 0.021). According to Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI), women had a higher disease burden with 73.7% of them included into the moderate or severe group of mortality risk, compared to 42.2% of men (p 0.014). Conversely, less women smoke (31.6% vs. 82.2%; p < 0.001) and less frequently chest pain was the onset symptom (78.9% vs. 95.1%; p 0.04). Time since symptom onset to door admission was estimated on 510 ± 1149 minutes and the mean women delay was superior (557 ± 858 minutes). Regarding to in-hospital hemorrhagic events, female patients had a statistically significant higher risk (22.2% vs. 7.1%, p 0.045), independently of hypertension, diabetes or anticoagulant therapy (r = 0.249; ANOVA p-value < 0.005), but it was associated with higher CCI (p 0.033). No other gender differences in outcomes were observed. Conclusions: Our study demonstrates gender-related differences among patients with STEMI. Indeed, women were older, had more clinical cardiovascular risk factors and tend to delay hospital admission after symptoms onset. Secondary endpoint was statistically more frequent in women, but no other differences in outcomes were observed.

Simple risk-score model for in-hospital major bleeding based on multiple blood variables in patients with acute myocardial infarction

BackgroundIn-hospital bleeding is associated with poor prognosis in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI). We sought to investigate whether a combination of pre-procedural blood tests could predict the incidence of in-hospital major bleeding in patients with AMI. Methods and resultsA total of 1684 consecutive AMI patients who underwent primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) were recruited and randomly divided into derivation (n = 1010) and validation (n = 674) cohorts. A risk-score model was created based on a combination of parameters assessed on routine blood tests on admission. In the derivation cohort, multivariate analysis revealed that the following 5 variables were significantly associated with in-hospital major bleeding: hemoglobin level < 12 g/dL (odds ratio [OR], 3.32), white blood cell count >10,000/μL (OR, 2.58), platelet count <150,000/μL (OR, 2.51), albumin level < 3.8 mg/dL (OR, 2.51), and estimated glomerular filtration rate < 60 mL/min/1.73 m2 (OR, 2.31). Zero to five points were given according to the number of these factors each patient had. Incremental risk scores were significantly associated with a higher incidence of in-hospital major bleeding in both cohorts (P < 0.001). Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis of risk models showed adequate discrimination between patients with and without in-hospital major bleeding (derivation cohort: area under the curve [AUC], 0.807; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.759–0.848; validation cohort: AUC, 0.793; 95% CI, 0.725–0.847). ConclusionsOur novel laboratory-based bleeding risk model could be useful for simple and objective prediction of in-hospital major bleeding events in patients with AMI.

Available bleeding scoring systems poorly predict major bleeding in the acute phase of pulmonary embolism

Abstract Background Bleeding prediction scores may help to guide acute management of patients with pulmonary embolism (PE). However, existing scoring systems have not been validated for in-hospital assessment. We aimed to compare 6 available bleeding scores, in a real-life cohort for the prediction of major in-hospital bleeding. Methods We recorded in-hospital characteristics of 2,754 PE patients included in a prospective observational multicenter cohort study contributing 18,028 person-days of follow-up. We assessed the VTE-BLEED, RIETE, ORBIT, HEMORRA2HAGES, ATRIA, and HAS-BLED scores at baseline. ISTH-defined bleeding events were independently adjudicated. The accuracy of the scores for the prediction of in-hospital bleeding was evaluated and compared. Results We observed 82 first in-hospital major bleeding events (3.0% (95% CI, 2.4–3.7)). Overall, the predictive power of bleeding scores was poor, with a C index ranging from 0.57 to 0.69 (Figure 1). The RIETE score had the numerically highest model fit and best discriminatory capacity, but without reaching statistical significance versus the ORBIT, HEMORR2HAGES, and ATRIA scores. The VTE-BLEED and HAS-BLED scores had significantly lower C indices, integrated discrimination improvement, and net reclassification improvement compared to the four others. Conclusion Currently available scoring systems have insufficient accuracy for the prediction of in-hospital major bleeding in patients with acute PE. The development of acute-PE-specific risk scores is needed to optimally target patients that warrant bleeding-prevention strategies. Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding sources: None. Figure 1

Accuracy of available scoring systems for prediction of in-hospital major bleeding in acute pulmonary embolism patients

Bleeding prediction scores may help guide acute management of patients with pulmonary embolism (PE). However existing scoring systems have not been validated for in-hospital assessment. We compared 6 available bleeding scores for the prediction of major bleeding in the in-hospital phase in a real-life cohort. We recorded in-hospital characteristics of 2754 PE patients included in a prospective observational multicenter cohort study contributing 18,028 person-days of follow-up. The VTE-BLEED, RIETE, ORBIT, HEMORR 2 HAGES, ATRIA, and HAS-BLED scores were assessed at baseline. ISTH-defined bleeding events were independently adjudicated. The accuracy of the overall, original 3-level and newly defined optimal 2-level outcome of the scores were evaluated and compared. We observed 82 first in-hospital major bleeding events [3.0% (95% CI, 2.4–3.7)]. Overall, the predictive power of bleeding scores was poor, with a Harrel's C index ranging from 0.57 to 0.69. The Riete score had the numerically highest model fit and discrimination capacity but without reaching statistical significance versus the ORBIT, HEMORR 2 HAGES, and ATRIA scores. The VTE-BLEED and HAS-BLED scores had significantly lower C indices, integrated discrimination improvement, and net reclassification improvement compared to the others. The rate of observed in-hospital major bleeding in score-defined low-risk patients was high, at between 15% to 34%. Current available scoring systems are not sufficiently accurate for the prediction of in-hospital major bleeding in patients with acute PE. There is a need to develop risk scores specific to acute PE to optimally target bleeding-prevention strategies.

Simple Risk-Score Model for In-Hospital Major Bleeding Based on Multiple Blood Variables in Patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction

Background: In-hospital bleeding is associated with poor prognosis in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI). We sought to investigate whether a combination of pre-procedural blood tests could predict the incidence of in-hospital major bleeding in patients with AMI. Methods and Results: A total of 1684 consecutive AMI patients who underwent primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) were recruited and randomly divided into derivation (n=1010) and validation (n=674) cohorts. A risk-score model was created based on a combination of parameters assessed on routine blood tests on admission. In the derivation cohort, multivariate analysis revealed that the following 5 variables were significantly associated with in-hospital major bleeding: hemoglobin level 10000/μL (OR, 2.58), platelet count < 150000/μL (OR, 2.51), albumin level < 3.8 mg/dL (OR, 2.51), and estimated glomerular filtration rate < 60 mL/min/1.73 m 2 (OR, 2.31). Zero to five points were given according to the number of these factors each patient had. Incremental risk scores were significantly associated with a higher incidence of in-hospital major bleeding in both cohorts ( P < 0.001). Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis of risk models showed adequate discrimination between patients with and without in-hospital major bleeding (derivation cohort: area under the curve [AUC], 0.807; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.759 – 0.848; validation cohort: AUC, 0.793; 95% CI, 0.725 – 0.847). Conclusions: Our novel laboratory-based bleeding risk model could be useful for simple and objective prediction of in-hospital major bleeding events in patients with AMI

Impact of coronary angioplasty in elderly patients with non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction.

BackgroundAs treatment of coronary artery disease improved over the last years, management of elder patients remained a matter of debate since this age group has been underrepresented in most trials. The study aimed to evaluate a population of patients with ≥ 85 years old with non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) and compare the prognosis according to coronary revascularization execution.MethodsWe retrospectively studied 324 patients included in a national multicenter registry between October 2010 and October 2018, who underwent coronary angiography and had at least one stenosis ≥ 50%.ResultsIn this population, 73.1% of the patients underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and 26.9% of the patients underwent optimized medical treatment (OMT). The OMT group had more past history of diabetes, stroke and dementia. On coronary angiography, the PCI group used more often the femoral artery access and single-vessel lesions were also more common. Three-vessel disease was more common in the OMT group. During hospitalization, there were more major bleeding events and death in the PCI group. During the one-year follow-up, there were no significant differences in all-cause mortality rate.ConclusionsVery old patients with NSTEMI submitted to OMT had more comorbidities and more three-vessel disease, factors that could have influenced the therapeutic decision. Patients undergoing PCI had more in-hospital major bleeding events and mortality, with no significant differences after one year.

P4619Comparison of the CRUSADE, ACUITY-HORIZONS, and ACTION bleeding risk scores for predicting in-hospital bleeding in acute myocardial infarction patients undergoing primary PCI

Abstract Background Considering clinical importance of bleeding complications in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI), bleeding risk stratification is a key part of the management of these patients. CRUSADE, ACTION and ACUITY-HORIZONS bleeding risk scores are available for predicting in-hospital major bleeding events in patients with acute myocardial infarction. Purpose We aimed to evaluate performance of the three above mentioned risk scores for predicting in-hospital bleeding events defined according to The Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) criteria. Methods From a prospective electronic registry of a high-volume catheterization laboratory in a period from January 2009 to December 2017, a total of 6505 consecutive patients with acute myocardial infarction who underwent pPCI were included in analysis. Calibration and discrimination of the three risk models were evaluated by the Hosmer-Lemeshow (H-L) goodness-of-fit test and C-statistic, respectively. Results Overall there were 372 (5.7%) bleeding events out of which 117 (1.8%) fulfilled stage BARC 3 or higher bleeding criteria. All three scores showed good model calibration as assessed by the H-Ls test and very good discriminative power for BARC 3 of higher bleeding events detection as assessed by C-statistics (Table 1 &amp; Figure 1): Bleeding events stage BARC 3 or higher were statistically highly related with higher in-hospital mortality (13.7% vs. 3.5%; p&lt;0.000). Table 1 Risk score H-L H-L p AUC 95% CI p CRUSADE 11.46 0.177 0.761 0.750–0.771 vs. ACUITY = ns vs. ACTION &lt;0.000 ACUITY-HORIZONS 10.47 0.236 0735 0.724–0.745 vs. ACTION = ns ACTION 5.74 0.677 0.701 0.698–0.712 Figure 1 Conclusions All three evaluated scores showed very good discriminative capacity for predicting BARC 3 or higher bleeding events in patients undergoing pPCI for AMI.

Intralesional versus intracoronary administration of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors during percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with acute coronary syndromes: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Background:Glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors (GPIs) have been regarded as an adjuvant regimen to deal with no-reflow. However, whether intralesional (IL) administration of GPIs improves myocardial reperfusion without increasing bleeding in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) compared with intracoronary (IC) administration has not been well addressed. Our meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of IL versus IC administration of GPIs for patients with ACS during percutaneous coronary intervention.Methods:We systematically searched Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Cambridge Scientific s from January 2007 to May 2017. Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) 3 flow, corrected TIMI frame count (CTFC), and complete ST-segment resolution (>70%) were selected as the primary outcomes. Major adverse cardiac events (MACEs) were the secondary outcome, and major bleeding complications were the safety outcome. Data analysis was conducted using the Review Manager 5.3 software.Results:Six randomized controlled trials were included in our meta-analysis. Compared with IC, IL obtained better results in terms of TIMI grade 3 flow [odds ratio (OR) 2.29; 95% confidence intervals (CIs) 1.31–4.01; P = .004], CTFC [weighted mean difference (WMD) -4.63; 95% CI -8.82 to -0.43; P = .03], and complete ST-segment resolution (OR 1.55; 95% CI 1.12–2.14; P = .008). There was a trend toward decreased MACE in the IL administration groups, which was not of statistical significance (OR 0.63; 95% CI 0.30–1.31; P = .22). No significant difference was found between the two groups in terms of in-hospital major bleeding events (OR 2.52; 95% CI .66 to 9.62; P = .18).Conclusion:IL administration yielded favorable outcomes in terms of myocardial tissue reperfusion as evidenced by the improved TIMI flow grade, CTFC, complete ST-segment resolution, and decreased MACE without increasing in-hospital major bleeding events. The IL administration of GPIs can be recommended as the preferred regimen to guard against no-reflow.

Comparison of the performance of the CRUSADE, ACUITY-HORIZONS, and ACTION bleeding scores in ACS patients undergoing PCI: insights from a cohort of 4939 patients in China.

BackgroundThe CRUSADE, ACTION and ACUITY-HORIZONS scores are commonly used for predicting in-hospital major bleeding events in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS), but the homogeneous nature of these models' population limits simple extrapolation to other local population. We aimed to compare the performance of the three risk models in Chinese patients.MethodsWe evaluated the performance of the three predicting scores for predicting in-hospital major bleeding events defined by thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI) serious (major and minor) episodes, in a cohort of Chinese ACS patients with either non-ST-elevation ACS (NSTE-ACS) or ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). Calibration and discrimination of the three risk models were evaluated by the Hosmer-Lemeshow test and C-statistic, respectively. We compared the predictive accuracy of the risk scores by the Delong non-parametric test.ResultsTIMI serious bleeding rate was 1.1% overall (1.9% and 0.86% for STEMI and NSTE-ACS, respectively). The CRUSADE, ACTION and ACUTIY-HORIZONS scores showed an adequate discriminatory capacity for major bleeding: in overall patients, the C-statistic was 0.80, 0.77, and 0.70, respectively; in NSTE-ACS patients, the C-statistic was 0.73, 0.72, and 0.64, respectively; in STEMI patients, the C-statistic was 0.91, 0.92, and 0.75, respectively. The C-statistic for the ACUITY-HORIZONS model was significantly lower than those of the CRUSADE and ACTION scores for the prediction of TIMI serious bleeding in overall patients (compared with CRUSADE, z = 3.83, P = 0.02; compared with ACTION, z = 3.51, P = 0.03); in NSTE-ACS patients (compared with CRUSADE, z = 2.37, P = 0.01; compared with ACTION, z = 2.11, P = 0.04), and in STEMI patients (compared with CRUSADE, z = 2.6.77, P = 0.02; compared with ACTION, z = 7.91, P = 0.002). No differences were observed when the CRUSADE and ACTION models were compared to each other, regardless of overall patients (z = 0.68, P = 0.31) and both of ACS types (NSTE-ACS, z = 0.52, P = 0.60), and STEMI patients (z = 0.36, P = 0.74). However, the three risk scores all overestimated the absolute major bleeding risk in each risk stratification in our study. For example, the predicted rate of CRUSADE score at high risk stratification was 11.9% vs. an actual rate of 5.3%.ConclusionsThe CRUSADE and ACTION scores had a greater calibration and discrimination for in-hospital major bleeding compared with the ACUITY-HORIZONS score in Chinese patients with ACS undergoing PCI. However, they all overestimated the bleeding risk rate for Chinese populations. Calibration of these risk scores would be useful for the generalization in Chinese populations.

Major bleeding events in Jordanian patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI): Incidence, associated factors, impact on prognosis, and predictability of the CRUSADE bleeding risk score. Results from the First Jordanian PCR (PCR1).

Objective:Determine the incidence of major bleeding events, their risk factors, and their impact on prognosis in Jordanian patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Evaluate the ability of the CRUSADE bleeding risk score (BRS) to predict major bleeding.Methods:Major bleeding events were defined according to the CRUSADE classification and their incidence was evaluated from hospital admission to one year of follow up. The CRUSADE bleeding risk score was calculated for each patient during the index admission. Incidence of major bleeding events was evaluated in each of the bleeding score quintiles. JoPCR1 is a prospective, observational, multicenter registry of consecutive patients who underwent PCI at 12 tertiary care centers in Jordan. A case report form was used to record data prospectively at hospital admission, at discharge, and at 1 and 12 months of follow-up.Results:The study included 2426 consecutive patients who underwent PCI. During the index hospitalization, major and minor bleeding events occurred in 0.95% and 2.6% of patients, respectively. Multivariate analysis showed that only two variables were significantly associated with major bleeding: female gender (OR=3.7; 95% CI 1.6, 8.5; p=0.002) and past history of cardiovascular disease (OR=2.6; 95% CI 1.1, 5.9; p=0.026). Patients who had in-hospital major bleeding events had higher cardiac mortality during index hospitalization (13.0% vs. 0.7%, p<0.005) and at one year of follow up (13.0% vs. 1.8%, p<0.005) compared to those who had no such events. Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis showed that the CRUSADE BRS has a high ability to predict major bleeding.Conclusion:Major bleeding events were uncommon in this ME registry of a contemporary cohort of patients undergoing PCI but were associated with a higher mortality rate compared with those who did not have major bleeding events. CRUSADE BRS was highly predictive of the incidence of major bleeding events.

Smoking Cessation in the Middle East after Percutaneous Coronary Intervention. Results from the First Jordanian Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Registry (JoPCR1)

Background: Cigarette smoking (CS) is a major risk factor for cardiovascular disease (CVD) in the Middle East. Little is known about the rate of SC in patients following percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and the clinical and angiographic features and one-year outcome among quitters compared with persistent smokers. Methods and Results: Of 2425 patients enrolled in a prospective multicenter PCI registry, 1055 (43.5%) were smokers (mean age 53.7 + 5.7 years) and 94% were males. PCI was indicated for ACS in 862 patients (82%). The rate of CS was 33%, 30% and 31%, at 1, 6 and 12 months after discharge, respectively. Compared with persistent smokers, quitters were more likely to have diabetes (50.4% vs. 42.0%; p = 0.028), low left ventricular ejection fraction (18.1% vs. 9.3%; p = 0.0004), and heart failure (15.4% vs. 9.0%; p = 0.0008). There were no differences between quitters and persistent smokers in age, gender, or severity of coronary lesions. Assessing the major complications and cardiovascular events during the index admission and at one year in non-smokers, quitters and persistent smokers showed that the incidence rates of in-hospital major bleeding events and cardiovascular deaths differed significantly among the three groups of patients (p-value = 0.017 for major bleeding, and 0.012 for cardiovascular death). The rates of these two complications were significantly higher among non-smokers compared to quitters and persistent smokers, and the rate of major bleeding was almost double in quitters compared to persistent smokers. Moreover, the three groups differed significantly in the rates of major bleeding, cardiovascular death and coronary revascularization after one year of follow-up. The incidence rates of major bleeding and cardiovascular death after one year were the highest among non-smokers followed by quitters and persistent smokers. The rate of coronary revascularization was significantly higher in quitters compared to non-smokers and persistent smokers. Conclusion: The rate of CS among Middle Eastern patients who undergo PCI is around 30%. Comprehensive secondary prevention strategy in such patients should include an effective smoking cessation program that extends beyond hospital discharge. Larger studies that extend the follow-up for several years are needed to document a positive impact of SC on improving cardiovascular outcome.

Use of Evidence-Based Therapies in Short-Term Outcomes of ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction and Non–ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction in Patients With Chronic Kidney Disease

Background— Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is a risk factor for myocardial infarction (MI) and death. Our goal was to characterize the association between CKD severity and short-term outcomes and the use of in-hospital evidence-based therapies among patients with ST-segment elevation MI (STEMI) and non–ST-segment elevation MI (NSTEMI). Methods and Results— The study sample was drawn from the Acute Coronary Treatment and Intervention Outcomes Network registry, a nationwide sample of STEMI (n=19 029) and NSTEMI (n=30 462) patients. Estimated glomerular filtration rate was calculated with the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease equation in relation to use of immediate (first 24 hours) therapies and early (first 48 hours) cardiac catheterization as well as in-hospital major bleeding events and death. Overall, 30.5% and 42.9% of patients with STEMI and NSTEMI, respectively, had CKD. Regardless of MI type, patients with progressively more severe CKD had higher rates of death. For STEMI, the odds ratio for stage 3a, 3b, 4, and 5 CKD compared with patients with no CKD was 2.49, 3.72, 4.82, and 7.97, respectively ( P trend &lt;0.0001). For NSTEMI, the analogous odds ratios were 1.81, 2.41, 3.50, and 4.09 ( P for trend &lt;0.0001). In addition, patients with progressively more severe CKD were less likely to receive immediate evidence-based therapies including aspirin, β-blockers, or clopidogrel, were less likely to undergo any reperfusion (STEMI) or revascularization (NSTEMI), and had higher rates of bleeding. Conclusions— Reports over the past decade have highlighted the importance of CKD among patients with MI. Data from this contemporary cohort suggest that patients with CKD still receive fewer evidence-based therapies and have substantially higher mortality rates.