Archives of cardiovascular diseases · 2019
Outcome associated with prescription of cardiac rehabilitation according to predicted risk after acute myocardial infarction: Insights from the FAST-MI registries.
СтатьяНаблюдательное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Puymirat Etienne, Bonaca Marc, Iliou Marie-Christine, Tea Victoria, Ducrocq Grégory, Douard Hervé, Labrunee Marc, Plastaras Philoktimon, Chevallereau Pierre, Taldir Guillaume, Bataille Vincent, Ferrières Jean, Schiele François, Simon Tabassome, Danchin Nicolas, FAST-MI investigators
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Cardiac rehabilitation is strongly recommended in patients after acute myocardial infarction.
AIMS: To assess cardiac rehabilitation prescription after acute myocardial infarction according to predicted risk, and its association with 1-year mortality, using the FAST-MI registries.
METHODS: We used data from three 1-month French nationwide registries, conducted 5 years apart from 2005 to 2015, including 13130 patients with acute myocardial infarction admitted to coronary or intensive care units. Atherothrombotic risk stratification was performed using the Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction Risk Score for Secondary Prevention (TRS-2P). Patients were classified into three categories: Group 1 (low risk; no or one risk indicator; score of 0 or 1); Group 2 (intermediate risk; two risk indicators; score of 2); and Group 3 (high risk; at least three risk indicators; score of≥3).
RESULTS: Among the 12291 patients, cardiac rehabilitation prescription was 43.6% (49.9% in Group 1; 43.0% in Group 2; 35.2% in Group 3). Using Cox multivariable analysis, cardiac rehabilitation prescription was associated with lower mortality at 1 year in the overall population (3.8% vs. 8.2%; hazard ratio [HR] 0.72, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.61-0.85; P<0.001). Cardiac rehabilitation was associated with improved 1-year mortality, with homogeneous relative risk reductions in low- and intermediate-risk categories (HR 0.70, 95% CI 0.51-0.94) compared with high-risk patients (HR 0.72, 95% CI 0.59-0.88). In absolute terms, however, mortality decrease associated with cardiac rehabilitation was positively correlated with risk level (Group 1, 0.9% vs. 2.4%; Group 2, 3.0% vs. 4.2%; Group 3, 10.5% vs. 17.3%).
CONCLUSION: Cardiac rehabilitation prescription was inversely correlated with patient risk. A positive association between cardiac rehabilitation and 1-year survival after acute myocardial infarction was present whatever the risk level, but the greatest mortality reduction was observed in high-risk patients.
AIMS: To assess cardiac rehabilitation prescription after acute myocardial infarction according to predicted risk, and its association with 1-year mortality, using the FAST-MI registries.
METHODS: We used data from three 1-month French nationwide registries, conducted 5 years apart from 2005 to 2015, including 13130 patients with acute myocardial infarction admitted to coronary or intensive care units. Atherothrombotic risk stratification was performed using the Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction Risk Score for Secondary Prevention (TRS-2P). Patients were classified into three categories: Group 1 (low risk; no or one risk indicator; score of 0 or 1); Group 2 (intermediate risk; two risk indicators; score of 2); and Group 3 (high risk; at least three risk indicators; score of≥3).
RESULTS: Among the 12291 patients, cardiac rehabilitation prescription was 43.6% (49.9% in Group 1; 43.0% in Group 2; 35.2% in Group 3). Using Cox multivariable analysis, cardiac rehabilitation prescription was associated with lower mortality at 1 year in the overall population (3.8% vs. 8.2%; hazard ratio [HR] 0.72, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.61-0.85; P<0.001). Cardiac rehabilitation was associated with improved 1-year mortality, with homogeneous relative risk reductions in low- and intermediate-risk categories (HR 0.70, 95% CI 0.51-0.94) compared with high-risk patients (HR 0.72, 95% CI 0.59-0.88). In absolute terms, however, mortality decrease associated with cardiac rehabilitation was positively correlated with risk level (Group 1, 0.9% vs. 2.4%; Group 2, 3.0% vs. 4.2%; Group 3, 10.5% vs. 17.3%).
CONCLUSION: Cardiac rehabilitation prescription was inversely correlated with patient risk. A positive association between cardiac rehabilitation and 1-year survival after acute myocardial infarction was present whatever the risk level, but the greatest mortality reduction was observed in high-risk patients.