4.5 Article

Use of aldosterone antagonists at discharge after myocardial infarction: Results from the National Cardiovascular Data Registry Acute Coronary Treatment and Intervention Outcomes Network (ACTION) Registry-Get with the Guidelines (GWTG)

期刊

AMERICAN HEART JOURNAL
卷 166, 期 4, 页码 709-715

出版社

MOSBY-ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.ahj.2013.06.020

关键词

-

资金

  1. Astra Zeneca
  2. Boehringer Ingelheim
  3. Bristol Myer Squibb
  4. Daiichi Sankyo
  5. Eli Lilly
  6. Genentech
  7. GlaxoSmithKline
  8. F. Hoffmann LaRoche
  9. Jannsen
  10. Merck
  11. Orexigen Therapeutics
  12. Sanofi Aventis
  13. Takeda Pharmaceuticals
  14. Agency for Healthcare Research Quality
  15. National Institutes of Health
  16. Novartis

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background Aldosterone antagonists (AldA) improve survival after myocardial infarction (MI) in patients with left ventricular systolic dysfunction (ejection fraction [EF] <40%) concomitant with either clinical heart failure (HF) or diabetes mellitus (DM). Although current American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association guidelines provide a class I recommendation for AldA therapy in such patients, how US practice reflects these recommendations is unclear. Methods Using data from the National Cardiovascular Data Registry ACTION Registry-GWTG, we describe contemporary discharge AldA prescription patterns among 202,213 patients discharged after acute MI from 526 US sites participating in ACTION Registry-GWTG between January 2007 and March 2011. Results Overall, 10.0% of patients were eligible for AldA without documented contraindication, with only 14.5% of eligible patients receiving AldA at discharge. Among the subset of AldA-eligible patients discharged on otherwise optimal medical therapy (68.9%), AldAs were prescribed to 16.1%. Aldosterone antagonist use was higher in patients with EF <40% and clinical HF with or without DM (17.7% and 16.6%, respectively), compared with patients with EF <40% and DM without clinical HF (7.8%, P < .001 for each). Fewer than 2% of participating centers used AldA in >= 50% of eligible patients. Conclusions Despite clinical outcome evidence and class I guideline recommendations, AldAs are underused in the United States, with only 1 in 7 eligible patients prescribed AldA at discharge after MI. This contrasts with high use of other evidence-based post-MI medications and identifies a specific gap in translation of evidence into clinical practice.

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

4.5
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