Background: Low socioeconomic status (SES) has been previously shown to be associated with worse cardiovascular outcomes. However, unlike in Australia, many of these studies have been performed in countries without universal healthcare where SES may be expected to have a greater impact on care and outcomes. We sought to determine whether there is an association between SES and baseline characteristics, clinical outcomes and use of secondary prevention therapy in patients with ST-segment–elevation myocardial infarction undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Methods and Results: We prospectively collected data on 5665 consecutive ST-segment–elevation myocardial infarction PCI patients between 2005 and 2015 from 6 government-funded hospitals participating in a multicenter registry. Patients were categorized into SES quintiles using the Index of Relative Socioeconomic Disadvantage system, a score allocated to each residential postcode based on factors like income, educational level, and employment status by the Australian Bureau of Statistics. In our study, lower SES patients were more likely to have diabetes mellitus, smoke, and initially present to a non-PCI capable hospital (all P ≤0.01). Among primary PCI patients, the median time to reperfusion was slightly higher in lower SES groups (211 [144–337] versus 193 [145–285] minutes, P <0.001). Drug-eluting stent use was higher in the higher SES groups ( P <0.001). At 12 months after PCI, lower SES patients had higher rates of ongoing smoking and lower use of guideline-recommended secondary prevention therapy (both P <0.01). Despite these differences, SES group was not found to be an independent predictor of 12-month major adverse cardiovascular events. Conclusions: Lower SES patients have more comorbidities and experienced slightly longer reperfusion times but otherwise similar care. Despite these baseline differences, clinical outcomes after ST-segment–elevation myocardial infarction PCI were similar regardless of SES.

Prasugrel and ticagrelor are increasingly used in ACS patients treated with PCI, predominantly in a younger cohort with less comorbidity. Although antiplatelet therapy should still be individualised based on the thrombotic and bleeding risk, our study highlights the safety of the new P2Y12 inhibitors in contemporary Australian practice.

No abstract

No abstract

Background Optimal secondary prevention pharmacotherapy is the cornerstone of post‐acute coronary syndrome (ACS) management. The prognostic impact of not receiving five guideline‐recommended therapies is poorly described. Aim To ascertain the prognostic significance of suboptimal pharmacotherapy in ACS survivors. Methods Consecutive patients with ACS from the Melbourne Interventional Group registry who were alive at 30 days following their index percutaneous coronary intervention were included. Patients were divided into three categories based on the number of secondary prevention medications prescribed. The optimal medical therapy (OMT), near‐optimal medical therapy (NMT), suboptimal medical therapy (SMT) groups were prescribed 5, 4 and ≤ 3 medications, respectively. Primary endpoint was long‐term mortality. Cox‐proportional hazard modelling was undertaken to assess independent predictors of survival. Results Of the 9375 patients included, 5678 (60.6%) received OMT, 2903 (31.0%) received NMT and 794 (8.5%) received SMT. Patients receiving SMT were older, more likely to be female and had higher burden of comorbidities (renal impairment, congestive heart failure, diabetes, peripheral vascular disease; P < 0.01 for all). SMT was associated with higher long‐term mortality at 3.9 ± 2.2 years when compared to NMT and OMT (16.8% vs 10.5% vs 8.2%, P < 0.001). Compared to OMT, SMT was an independent predictor of long‐term mortality (hazard ratio, HR 1.62, 95% confidence interval, CI 1.30–2.02, P < 0.01) while NMT was associated with a clinically significant 14% mortality hazard (HR 1.14, 95% CI 0.97–1.34, P = 0.11). Conclusions There is a graded long‐term hazard associated with not receiving OMT after an ACS. Improvements in secondary prevention pharmacotherapy models of care are warranted to further decrease the long‐term mortality.

Clopidogrel resistance has been used as one of the terms employed in the literature to describe different degrees of ex vivo low platelet inhibition after clopidogrel administration. In addition to the diverse nomenclature, the characterisation of clopidogrel resistance has also been problematic because different authors have given different definitions. The mechanisms responsible for this decreased platelet response are not yet clearly defined, some hypotheses have been put forward but not yet demonstrated. Although there have been no large prospective studies demonstrating that the degree of platelet inhibition is directly related to clinical outcomes, several recent studies and reports have shown an association between less platelet inhibition and more adverse events after percutaneous coronary interventions with clopidogrel therapy suggesting that clopidogrel resistance may be a marker for increased risk of recurrent cardiovascular events. Larger scale investigations are needed to support these findings.

No abstract

No abstract