Advertisement

Internal and Emergency Medicine

, Volume 3, Issue 2, pp 109–115 | Cite as

Management of acute myocardial infarction in the real world: a summary report from The Ami-Florence Italian Registry

  • Daniela Balzi
  • Alessandro Barchielli
  • Giovanni Maria Santoro
  • Nazario Carrabba
  • Eva Buiatti
  • Cristina Giglioli
  • Serafina Valente
  • Giorgio Baldereschi
  • Laura Del Bianco
  • Matteo Monami
  • Gian Franco Gensini
  • Niccolò MarchionniEmail author
  • for the AMI-Florence Working Group
IM - Original

Abstract

The Florence Acute Myocardial Infarction registry was a population-based, prospective study aimed at identifying the determinants of coronary reperfusion therapy [CRT, by primary coronary intervention (PCI) in more than 95% of cases] utilization and of prognosis in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). The registry involved one teaching hospital with, and five district hospitals without PCI facilities. Overall, as many as 45.6% of 930 cases of STEMI did not receive any form of CRT. In multivariable analysis, the direct admission to the teaching hospital was the strongest positive predictor, whereas the time delay, older age, and chronic comorbid conditions were negative predictors of CRT utilization. Compared to conservative therapy, CRT was associated with a remarkably reduced 12-month mortality, after adjusting for age, chronic comorbidities and Killip class, which also were significantly associated with long-term prognosis. The higher crude mortality observed in women was accounted for by older age and other age-related factors. The improvement in prognosis with CRT was larger in older patients and/or in those with a greater burden of chronic comorbidity, who less frequently received CRT. These results suggest the need for interdisciplinary reassessing the adherence to therapeutic guidelines and the criteria adopted in the real clinical world to select patients for CRT during STEMI.

Keywords

Acute myocardial infarction Coronary reperfusion Ageing Comorbidity 

References

  1. 1.
    Buiatti E, Barchielli A, Marchionni N et al (2003) Determinants of treatment strategies and survival in acute myocardial infarction: a population-based study in the Florence district, Italy: results of the acute myocardial infarction Florence registry (AMI-Florence). Eur Heart J 24:1195–1203PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ryan TJ, Antman EM, Brooks NH et al (1999) Update: ACC/AHA Guidelines for the management of patients with acute myocardial infarction: executive summary and recommendations: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (Committee on Management of Acute Myocardial Infarction). Circulation 100:1016–1030PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Keeley EC, Boura JA, Grines CL (2003) Primary angioplasty versus intravenous thrombolytic therapy for acute myocardial infarction: a quantitative review of 23 randomised trials. Lancet 361:13–20PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Balzi D, Barchielli A, Buiatti E et al (2006) Effect of comorbidity on coronary reperfusion strategy and long-term mortality after acute myocardial infarction. Am Heart J 151:1094–1100PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Antman EM, Anbe DT, Armstrong PW et al (2004) ACC/AHA guidelines for the management of patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction-executive summary. A report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (Writing Committee to revise the 1999 guidelines for the management of patients with acute myocardial infarction). J Am Coll Cardiol 44:671–719PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Carruthers KF, Dabbous OH, Flather MD, Starkey I, Jacob A, Macleod D, Fox KA (2005) GRACE investigators. Contemporary management of acute coronary syndromes: does the practice match the evidence? The global registry of acute coronary events (GRACE). Heart 91(3):290–298PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Barchielli A, Buiatti E, Balzi D et al (2004) Age-related changes in treatment strategies for acute myocardial infarction: a population-based study. J Am Geriatr Soc 52:1355–1360PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Carrabba N, Santoro GM, Balzi D et al (2004) In-hospital management and outcome in women with acute myocardial infarction (data from the AMI-Florence Registry). Am J Cardiol 94:1118–1123PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    GISSI-2 (1990) A factorial randomised trial of alteplase versus streptokinase and heparin versus no heparin among 12,490 patients with acute myocardial infarction. Gruppo Italiano per lo Studio della Sopravvivenza nell’Infarto Miocardico. Lancet 336:65–71Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Fibrinolytic Therapy Trialists’ (FTT) Collaborative Group (1994) Indications for fibrinolytic therapy in suspected acute myocardial infarction: collaborative overview of early mortality and major morbidity results from all randomised trials of more than 1,000 patients. Lancet 343:311–322Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Wood E, Sallar AM, Schechter MT, Hogg RS (1999) Social inequalities in male mortality amenable to medical intervention in British Columbia. Soc Sci Med 48:1751–1758PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Di Chiara A, Chiarella F, Savonitto S et al (2003) Epidemiology of acute myocardial infarction in the Italian CCU network—The BLITZ Study. Eur Heart J 24:1616–1629PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Stenestrand U, Lindback J, Wallentin L (2006) Long-term outcome of primary percutaneous coronary intervention vs prehospital and in-hospital thrombolysis for patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction. JAMA 296:1749–1756PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Keeley EC, Grines CL (2004) Primary coronary intervention for acute myocardial infarction. JAMA 291:736–739PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Mehta RH, Granger CB, Alexander KP, Bossone E, White HD, Sketch MH Jr (2005) Reperfusion strategies for acute myocardial infarction in the elderly: benefits and risks. J Am Coll Cardiol 45:471–478PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Barron HV, Bowlby LJ, Breen T et al (1998) Use of reperfusion therapy for acute myocardial infarction in the United States: data from the National Registry of Myocardial Infarction 2. Circulation 97:1150–1156PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Eagle KA, Goodman SG, Avezum A et al (2002) Practice variation and missed opportunities for reperfusion in ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction: findings from the Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events (GRACE). Lancet 359:373–377PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Parmley WW (1997) Do we practice geriatric cardiology? J Am Coll Cardiol 29:217–218PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© SIMI 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Daniela Balzi
    • 1
  • Alessandro Barchielli
    • 1
  • Giovanni Maria Santoro
    • 2
  • Nazario Carrabba
    • 3
  • Eva Buiatti
    • 4
  • Cristina Giglioli
    • 5
  • Serafina Valente
    • 5
  • Giorgio Baldereschi
    • 6
  • Laura Del Bianco
    • 6
  • Matteo Monami
    • 6
  • Gian Franco Gensini
    • 5
  • Niccolò Marchionni
    • 6
    Email author
  • for the AMI-Florence Working Group
  1. 1.Epidemiology Unit, Azienda Sanitaria FirenzeFlorenceItaly
  2. 2.Division of Cardiology 1FlorenceItaly
  3. 3.Division of CardiologyAzienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria CareggiFlorenceItaly
  4. 4.Epidemiology Unit, Agenzia Regionale di Sanità della ToscanaFlorenceItaly
  5. 5.Division of Internal Medicine and General CardiologyAzienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria CareggiFlorenceItaly
  6. 6.Division of Geriatric Cardiology, Department of Cardiology and Vascular MedicineAzienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria CareggiFlorenceItaly

Personalised recommendations