Prediction of no-reflow phenomenon in patients treated with primary percutaneous coronary intervention for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction.


Journal

Medicine
ISSN: 1536-5964
Titre abrégé: Medicine (Baltimore)
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 2985248R

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
26 Jun 2020
Historique:
entrez: 27 6 2020
pubmed: 27 6 2020
medline: 8 7 2020
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

No-reflow is an important complication among patients with acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).A retrospective study of 1658 STEMI patients undergoing direct PCI was performed. Patients were randomly assigned at a 7:3 ratio into development cohort and validation cohort and into no-reflow and normal blood flow groups. Clinical data and laboratory examinations were compared to identify independent risk factors and establish a no-reflow risk scoring system.In the development cohort (n = 1122), 331 (29.5%) had no-reflow. Multivariate analysis showed age ≥ 65 years (OR = 1.766, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.313-2.376, P < .001), not using angiotonase inhibitor/angiotensin receptor antagonists (OR = 1.454, 95%CI: 1.084-1.951, P = .013), collateral circulation <grade 2 (OR = 3.056, 95%CI: 1.566-5.961, P = .001), thrombosis burden ≥4 points (OR = 2.033, 95%CI: 1.370-3.018, P < .001), diameter of target lesion ≥3.5 mm (OR = 1.511, 95%CI: 1.087-2.100, P = .014), thrombosis aspiration (OR = 1.422, 95%CI: 1.042-1.941, P = .026), and blood glucose >8 mmol/L (OR = 1.386, 95%CI: 1.007-1.908, P = .045) were related to no-reflow. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) area under the curve was 0.648 (95%CI: 0.609-0.86). At 0.349 cutoff sensitivity was 42.0%, specificity was 79.3%, positive predictive value (PPV) was 44.7%, negative predictive value (NPV) was 77.4%, P < .001. The resulting risk scoring system was tested in the validation cohort (n = 536), with 30.1% incidence of no-reflow. The area under the ROC curve was 0.637 (95%CI: 0.582-0.692). At a cutoff of 0.349 sensitivity was 53.2% and specificity was 66.7%, PPV was 41.2%, NPV was 76.4%, P < .001.The no-reflow risk scoring system was effective in identifying high-risk patients.

Identifiants

pubmed: 32590726
doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000020152
pii: 00005792-202006260-00001
pmc: PMC7329019
doi:

Substances chimiques

Blood Glucose 0

Types de publication

Journal Article Validation Study

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

e20152

Références

J Am Coll Cardiol. 2006 Oct 3;48(7):1355-60
pubmed: 17010794
Am J Cardiol. 2005 Jul 15;96(2):183-6
pubmed: 16018838
Am J Cardiol. 2013 Jan 15;111(2):178-84
pubmed: 23111142
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2009 Jan 27;53(4):309-15
pubmed: 19161878
Prog Cardiovasc Dis. 2008 Mar-Apr;50(5):352-82
pubmed: 18313480
Circ J. 2008 May;72(5):716-21
pubmed: 18441449
Kardiol Pol. 2014;72(1):27-33
pubmed: 23990232
Circulation. 2001 May 29;103(21):2550-4
pubmed: 11382722
Res Cardiovasc Med. 2015 May 23;4(2):e25414
pubmed: 26393231
Chest. 2002 Oct;122(4):1322-32
pubmed: 12377860
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2003 Jan 1;41(1):1-7
pubmed: 12570936
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2008 Aug 12;52(7):512-7
pubmed: 18687242
Indian Heart J. 2018 Dec;70 Suppl 3:S406-S418
pubmed: 30595300
Indian Heart J. 2016 Jul-Aug;68(4):539-51
pubmed: 27543480
Cardiovasc Ther. 2013 Jun;31(3):e7-e11
pubmed: 22953997
Am J Cardiol. 2003 Dec 15;92(12):1445-7
pubmed: 14675583
Int J Cardiol Heart Vasc. 2014 Dec 30;6:25-31
pubmed: 28785622
Arch Intern Med. 2004 May 10;164(9):982-8
pubmed: 15136307
Int J Cardiol. 2016 Jan 1;202:433-40
pubmed: 26433167
Arch Cardiovasc Dis. 2010 Oct;103(10):512-21
pubmed: 21130964
Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2008 Nov 15;72(6):783-9
pubmed: 18798327
N Engl J Med. 1985 Apr 4;312(14):932-6
pubmed: 4038784
Lancet. 2015 Jan 31;385(9966):441-51
pubmed: 24969506
Circulation. 2008 Jun 17;117(24):3152-6
pubmed: 18559715
Can J Cardiol. 2008 Aug;24(8):633-9
pubmed: 18685744
Cardiology. 2013;124(3):153-60
pubmed: 23485798
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2009 Jul 21;54(4):281-92
pubmed: 19608025
Minerva Cardioangiol. 2016 Aug;64(4):367-74
pubmed: 25516137
Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci. 2018 Aug;22(15):4987-4994
pubmed: 30070335
Heart. 2002 Feb;87(2):162-8
pubmed: 11796561
Clin Cardiol. 2007 Mar;30(3):130-4
pubmed: 17385720
Circ Res. 2014 Jun 6;114(12):1944-58
pubmed: 24902977
Am J Cardiol. 2009 Nov 1;104(9):1204-9
pubmed: 19840563
Circulation. 2000 Jan 18;101(2):125-30
pubmed: 10637197
Angiology. 2008 Oct-Nov;59(5):587-92
pubmed: 18388082
Chest. 2004 Apr;125(4):1492-9
pubmed: 15078763
Pak J Med Sci. 2015;31(3):576-81
pubmed: 26150847
Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2014 Nov 15;84(6):965-72
pubmed: 24402881
World J Emerg Med. 2014;5(2):96-102
pubmed: 25215156
Coron Artery Dis. 2014 Nov;25(7):582-8
pubmed: 25083839
J Am Coll Cardiol. 1985 Mar;5(3):587-92
pubmed: 3156171

Auteurs

Li Yang (L)

Department of Cardiology, Tianjin Chest Hospital.

Hongliang Cong (H)

Department of Cardiology, Tianjin Chest Hospital.

Yali Lu (Y)

Department of Epidemiology and Health Statistics, School of Public Health, Tianjin Medical University.

Xiaolin Chen (X)

Department of Cardiology, Thoracic Clinical College, Tianjin Medical University, Tianjin, China.

Yin Liu (Y)

Department of Cardiology, Tianjin Chest Hospital.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH