Aims Quality indicators (QIs) are tools to improve the delivery of evidence-base medicine. In 2017, the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) Association for Acute Cardiovascular Care (ACVC) developed a set of QIs for acute myocardial infarction (AMI), which have been evaluated at national and international levels and across different populations. However, an update of these QIs is needed in light of the accumulated experience and the changes in the supporting evidence. Methods and results The ESC methodology for the QI development was used to update the 2017 ACVC QIs. We identified key domains of AMI care, conducted a literature review, developed a list of candidate QIs, and used a modified Delphi method to select the final set of indicators. The same seven domains of AMI care identified by the 2017 Study Group were retained for this update. For each domain, main and secondary QIs were developed reflecting the essential and complementary aspects of care, respectively. Overall, 26 QIs are proposed in this document, compared to 20 in the 2017 set. New QIs are proposed in this document (e.g. the centre use of high-sensitivity troponin), some were retained or modified (e.g. the in-hospital risk assessment), and others were retired in accordance with the changes in evidence [e.g. the proportion of patients with non-ST segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) treated with fondaparinux] and the feasibility assessments (e.g. the proportion of patients with NSTEMI whom risk assessment is performed using the GRACE and CRUSADE risk scores). Conclusion Updated QIs for the management of AMI were developed according to contemporary knowledge and accumulated experience. These QIs may be applied to evaluate and improve the quality of AMI care.

BackgroundThe presence of diabetes mellitus poses a challenge in the treatment of patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI). We aimed to evaluate the sex-specific outcomes of diabetic and non-diabetic patients with AMI who have undergone percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).MethodsData of the Estonian Myocardial Infarction Registry for years 2006–2009 were linked with the Health Insurance Fund database and the Population Registry. Hazard ratios (HRs) with the 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for the primary composite outcome (non-fatal AMI, revascularization, or death whichever occurred first) and for the secondary outcome (all cause mortality) were calculated comparing diabetic with non-diabetic patients by sex.ResultsIn the final study population (n = 1652), 14.6% of the men and 24.0% of the women had diabetes. Overall, the diabetics had higher rates of cardiovascular risk factors, co-morbidities, and 3–4 vessel disease among both men and women (p < 0.01). Among women, the diabetic patients were younger, they presented later and less often with typical symptoms of chest pain than the non-diabetics (p < 0.01). Women with diabetes received aspirin and reperfusion for ST-segment elevation AMI less often than those without diabetes (p < 0.01). During a follow-up of over two years, in multivariate analysis, diabetes was associated with worse outcomes only in women: the adjusted HR for the primary outcome 1.44 (95% CI 1.05 − 1.96) and for the secondary outcome 1.83 (95% CI 1.17 − 2.89). These results were largely driven by a high (12.0%) mortality during hospitalization of diabetic women.ConclusionsDiabetic women with AMI who have undergone PCI are a high-risk group warranting special attention in treatment strategies, especially during hospitalization. There is a need to improve the expertise to detect AMI earlier, decrease disparities in management, and find targeted PCI strategies with adjunctive antithrombotic regimes in women with diabetes.

No abstract

Aims To study baseline characteristics, in-hospital managements and mortality of non-ST elevation MI (NSTEMI) patients in different European countries. Methods and Results NSTEMI patients enrolled in the national MI registries (EMIR; n = 5,817 (Estonia), HUMIR; n = 30,787 (Hungary), NORMI; n = 33,054 (Norway) and SWEDEHEART; n = 49,533 (Sweden)) from 2014 to 2017 were included and presented as aggregated data. The median age at admission ranged from 70 to 75 years. Current smoking status was numerically higher in Norway (24%), Estonia (22%) and Hungary (19%), as compared to Sweden (17%). Patients in Hungary had a high rate of diabetes mellitus (37%) and hypertension (84%). The proportion of performed coronary angiographies (58% versus 75%) and percutaneous coronary interventions (38% versus 56%), differed most between Norway and Hungary. Prescription of dual antiplatelet therapy at hospital discharge ranged from 60% (Estonia) to 81% (Hungary). In-hospital death ranged from 3.5% (Sweden) to 9% (Estonia). The crude mortality rate at 1 month was 12% in Norway and 5% in Sweden (5%), whereas the 1-year mortality rates were similar (20-23%) in Hungary, Estonia and Norway and 15% in Sweden. Conclusion Cross-comparisons of four national European MI registries provide important data on differences in risk factors and treatment regiments that may explain some of the observed differences in death rates. A unified European continuous MI registry could be an option to better understand how implementation of guideline recommended therapy can be used to reduce the burden of cardiovascular disease.