4.6 Article

The prognostic effect of left ventricular thrombus formation after acute myocardial infarction in the contemporary era of primary percutaneous coronary intervention: A meta-analysis

期刊

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF INTERNAL MEDICINE
卷 73, 期 -, 页码 43-50

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejim.2019.10.029

关键词

Left ventricular thrombus; Acute myocardial infarction; Primary PCI; Prognosis

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Backgrounds: : The prognosis and management of left ventricular thrombus (LVT) following acute myocardial infarction (AMI) have not been well evaluated since the advent of primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). We therefore conducted a meta-analysis to assess the prognostic effect of LVT after AMI in primary PCI era and investigate the impact of triple therapy on outcomes. Methods: : We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library for studies conducted in primary PCI era up to 29 March 2019, compering the incidence of embolic events and mortality after AMI between LVT patients and Non-LVT patients. Random-effect models were used. Subgroup analysis was done by comparing triple therapy treated LVT group with Non-LVT group. Result: : A total of 12 studies were included. LVT was associated with increased risk of embolic events and long-term mortality (RR 3.97, 95%CI 2.68-5.89, P < 0.0001; RR 2.34, 95%CI 1.38-3.96, P = 0.002). Subgroup analysis was also done by comparing triple therapy treated LVT group with Non-LVT group. Despite a downward tendency was observed, the embolic risk of triple therapy subgroup was higher than non-LVT group (RR 2.79, 95%CI 1.32-5.91, P = 0.007). Triple therapy subgroup had a similar mortality rate compared with non-LVT group (RR 0.93, 95%CI 0.34-2.52, P = 0.88). Conclusion: : In primary PCI era, LVT formation after AMI indicated a fourfold increased embolic risk and twofold long-term mortality rate. Triple therapy may be a safe way to improve the outcomes, but still need to be confirmed by future trials.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据