...
首页> 外文期刊>Critical care medicine >Antiarrhythmic drug therapy for sustained ventricular arrhythmias complicating acute myocardial infarction.
【24h】

Antiarrhythmic drug therapy for sustained ventricular arrhythmias complicating acute myocardial infarction.

机译:抗心律失常药物治疗持续性室性心律失常并发急性心肌梗塞。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

OBJECTIVE: Few data exist to guide antiarrhythmic drug therapy for sustained ventricular tachycardia/ventricular fibrillation after acute myocardial infarction. The objective of this analysis was to describe the survival of patients with sustained ventricular tachycardia/ventricular fibrillation after myocardial infarction according to antiarrhythmic drug treatment. DESIGN AND SETTING: We conducted a retrospective analysis of ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction patients with sustained ventricular tachycardia/ventricular fibrillation in Global Use of Strategies to Open Occluded Coronary Arteries in Acute Coronary Syndromes (GUSTO) IIB and GUSTO III and compared all-cause death in patients receiving amiodarone, lidocaine, or no antiarrhythmic. We used Cox proportional-hazards modeling and inverse weighted estimators to adjust for baseline characteristics, beta-blocker use, and propensity to receive antiarrhythmics. Due to nonproportional hazards for death in early follow-up (0-3 hrs after sustained ventricular tachycardia/ventricular fibrillation) compared with later follow-up (>3 hrs), we analyzed all-cause mortality using time-specific hazards. PATIENTS AND INTERVENTIONS: Among 19,190 acute myocardial infarction patients, 1,126 (5.9%) developed sustained ventricular tachycardia/ventricular fibrillation and met the inclusion criteria. Patients received lidocaine (n = 664, 59.0%), amiodarone (n = 50, 4.4%), both (n = 110, 9.8%), or no antiarrhythmic (n = 302, 26.8%). RESULTS: In the first 3 hrs after ventricular tachycardia/ventricular fibrillation, amiodarone (adjusted hazard ratio 0.39, 95% confidence interval 0.21-0.71) and lidocaine (adjusted hazard ratio 0.72, 95% confidence interval 0.53-0.96) were associated with a lower hazard of death-likely evidence of survivor bias. Among patients who survived 3 hrs, amiodarone was associated with increased mortality at 30 days (adjusted hazard ratio 1.71, 95% confidence interval 1.02-2.86) and 6 months (adjusted hazard ratio 1.96, 95% confidence interval 1.21-3.16), but lidocaine was not at 30 days (adjusted hazard ratio 1.19, 95% confidence interval 0.77-1.82) or 6 months (adjusted hazard ratio 1.10, 95% confidence interval 0.73-1.66). CONCLUSION: Among patients with acute myocardial infarction complicated by sustained ventricular tachycardia/ventricular fibrillation who survive 3 hrs, amiodarone, but not lidocaine, is associated with an increased risk of death, reinforcing the need for randomized trials in this population.
机译:目的:目前尚无数据可指导急性心肌梗死后持续性室性心动过速/室颤的抗心律失常药物治疗。该分析的目的是根据抗心律不齐药物治疗描述心肌梗死后持续性室性心动过速/心室纤颤的患者的生存率。设计与地点:我们对ST段抬高型心肌梗死伴持续性室性心动过速/心室颤动的患者进行回顾性分析,探讨了急性冠状动脉综合征(GUSTO)IIB和GUSTO III的开放性冠状动脉开放策略的全球使用情况,并比较了全因胺碘酮,利多卡因或无抗心律不齐患者死亡。我们使用Cox比例风险模型和反加权估计量来调整基线特征,使用β受体阻滞剂和接受抗心律失常药的倾向。由于早期随访(持续性室性心动过速/心室颤动后0-3小时)与非晚期随访(> 3小时)相比有非比例的死亡危险,因此我们使用特定时间的危害分析了全因死亡率。患者与干预措施:在19,190例急性心肌梗死患者中,有1,126例(5.9%)出现持续性室性心动过速/心室纤颤并符合纳入标准。患者接受利多卡因(n = 664,59.0%),胺碘酮(n = 50,4.4%),两者(n = 110,9.8%)或未接受抗心律不齐(n = 302,26.8%)。结果:在室性心动过速/心室纤颤后的最初3小时内,胺碘酮(风险比调整后为0.39,95%置信区间为0.21-0.71)和利多卡因(风险比调整后为0.72,95%置信区间为0.53-0.96)与较低的风险相关。死亡危险-幸存者偏见的证据。在存活3小时的患者中,胺碘酮与30天(调整后的危险比1.71,95%置信区间1.02-2.86)和6个月(调整后的危险比1.96,95%置信区间1.21-3.16)时死亡率增加有关,但是利多卡因不在30天(调整后的危险比1.19,95%置信区间0.77-1.82)或6个月(调整后的危险比1.10,95%置信区间0.73-1.66)。结论:存活3小时的急性心肌梗死并发持续性室性心动过速/心室颤动的患者中,胺碘酮而非利多卡因与死亡风险增加相关,这增加了对该人群进行随机试验的需要。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号