4.3 Review

Effect of primary percutaneous coronary intervention on in-hospital outcomes among active cancer patients presenting with ST-elevation myocardial infarction: a propensity score matching analysis

Journal

EUROPEAN HEART JOURNAL-ACUTE CARDIOVASCULAR CARE
Volume 10, Issue 8, Pages 829-839

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/ehjacc/zuaa032

Keywords

Cancer; STEMI; Percutaneous coronary intervention; Management; Outcomes

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study analyzed data from STEMI patients in the National Inpatient Sample from 2004 to 2015 and found that despite lower rates of adverse events and all-cause mortality associated with pPCI in patients with current cancer, the utilization of pPCI in these patients was low. Further research is needed to assess the long-term benefits and safety of pPCI in this high-risk group.
Aims Primary percutaneous coronary intervention (pPCI) is the gold standard, guideline-recommended revascularization strategy in patients presenting with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). However, there are limited data on its use and effectiveness among patients with active cancer presenting with STEMI. Methods and results All STEMI hospitalizations between 2004 and 2015 from the National Inpatient Sample were retrospectively analysed, stratified by cancer type. Propensity score matching was performed to estimate the average treatment effect of pPCI in each cancer on in-hospital adverse events, including major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) and its individual components, and compare treatment effect between cancer and non-cancer patients. Out of 1 870 815 patients with STEMI, 38 932 (2.1%) had a current cancer diagnosis [haematological: 11 251 (28.9% of all cancers); breast: 4675 (12.0%); lung: 9538 (24.5%); colon: 3749 (9.6%); prostate: 9719 (25.0%)]. Patients with cancer received pPCI less commonly than those without cancer (from 54.2% for lung cancer to 70.6% for haematological vs. 82.3% in no cancer). Performance of pPCI was strongly associated with lower adjusted probabilities of MACCE and all-cause mortality in the cancer groups compared with the no cancer group. There was no significant difference in estimated average pPCI treatment effect between the cancer groups and non-cancer group. Conclusion Primary percutaneous coronary intervention is underutilized in STEMI patients with current cancer despite its significantly lower associated rates of in-hospital all-cause mortality and MACCE that is comparable to patients without cancer. Further work is required to assess the long-term benefit and safety of pPCI in this high-risk group.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available