BackgroundFor acute myocardial infarction (AMI) without heart failure (HF), it is unclear if β-blockers are associated with reduced mortality.ObjectivesThe goal of this study was to determine the association between β-blocker use and mortality in patients with AMI without HF or left ventricular systolic dysfunction (LVSD).MethodsThis cohort study used national English and Welsh registry data from the Myocardial Ischaemia National Audit Project. A total of 179,810 survivors of hospitalization with AMI without HF or LVSD, between January 1, 2007, and June 30, 2013 (final follow-up: December 31, 2013), were assessed. Survival-time inverse probability weighting propensity scores and instrumental variable analyses were used to investigate the association between the use of β-blockers and 1-year mortality.ResultsOf 91,895 patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction and 87,915 patients with non–ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, 88,542 (96.4%) and 81,933 (93.2%) received β-blockers, respectively. For the entire cohort, with >163,772 person-years of observation, there were 9,373 deaths (5.2%). Unadjusted 1-year mortality was lower for patients who received β-blockers compared with those who did not (4.9% vs. 11.2%; p < 0.001). However, after weighting and adjustment, there was no significant difference in mortality between those with and without β-blocker use (average treatment effect [ATE] coefficient: 0.07; 95% confidence interval [CI]: −0.60 to 0.75; p = 0.827). Findings were similar for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (ATE coefficient: 0.30; 95% CI: −0.98 to 1.58; p = 0.637) and non–ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (ATE coefficient: −0.07; 95% CI: −0.68 to 0.54; p = 0.819).ConclusionsAmong survivors of hospitalization with AMI who did not have HF or LVSD as recorded in the hospital, the use of β-blockers was not associated with a lower risk of death at any time point up to 1 year. (β-Blocker Use and Mortality in Hospital Survivors of Acute Myocardial Infarction Without Heart Failure; NCT02786654)

BackgroundThere is limited knowledge of the scale and impact of multimorbidity for patients who have had an acute myocardial infarction (AMI). Therefore, this study aimed to determine the extent to which multimorbidity is associated with long-term survival following AMI.Methods and findingsThis national observational study included 693,388 patients (median age 70.7 years, 452,896 [65.5%] male) from the Myocardial Ischaemia National Audit Project (England and Wales) who were admitted with AMI between 1 January 2003 and 30 June 2013. There were 412,809 (59.5%) patients with multimorbidity at the time of admission with AMI, i.e., having at least 1 of the following long-term health conditions: diabetes, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease or asthma, heart failure, renal failure, cerebrovascular disease, peripheral vascular disease, or hypertension. Those with heart failure, renal failure, or cerebrovascular disease had the worst outcomes (39.5 [95% CI 39.0–40.0], 38.2 [27.7–26.8], and 26.6 [25.2–26.4] deaths per 100 person-years, respectively). Latent class analysis revealed 3 multimorbidity phenotype clusters: (1) a high multimorbidity class, with concomitant heart failure, peripheral vascular disease, and hypertension, (2) a medium multimorbidity class, with peripheral vascular disease and hypertension, and (3) a low multimorbidity class. Patients in class 1 were less likely to receive pharmacological therapies compared with class 2 and 3 patients (including aspirin, 83.8% versus 87.3% and 87.2%, respectively; β-blockers, 74.0% versus 80.9% and 81.4%; and statins, 80.6% versus 85.9% and 85.2%). Flexible parametric survival modelling indicated that patients in class 1 and class 2 had a 2.4-fold (95% CI 2.3–2.5) and 1.5-fold (95% CI 1.4–1.5) increased risk of death and a loss in life expectancy of 2.89 and 1.52 years, respectively, compared with those in class 3 over the 8.4-year follow-up period. The study was limited to all-cause mortality due to the lack of available cause-specific mortality data. However, we isolated the disease-specific association with mortality by providing the loss in life expectancy following AMI according to multimorbidity phenotype cluster compared with the general age-, sex-, and year-matched population.ConclusionsMultimorbidity among patients with AMI was common, and conferred an accumulative increased risk of death. Three multimorbidity phenotype clusters that were significantly associated with loss in life expectancy were identified and should be a concomitant treatment target to improve cardiovascular outcomes.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT03037255.

AimTo investigate sex differences in acute myocardial infarction (AMI) guideline-indicated care as defined by the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) Acute Cardiovascular Care Association (ACCA) quality indicators.MethodsNationwide cohort study comprising 691 290 AMI hospitalisations in England and Wales (n=233 hospitals) from the Myocardial Ischaemia National Audit Project between 1 January 2003 and 30 June 2013.ResultsThere were 34.5% (n=238 489) women (median age 76.7 (IQR 66.3–84.0) years; 33.9% (n=80 884) ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI)) and 65.5% (n=452 801) men (median age 67.1 (IQR 56.9–77.2) years; 42.5% (n=192 229) STEMI). Women less frequently received 13 of the 16 quality indicators compared with men, including timely reperfusion therapy for STEMI (76.8% vs 78.9%; p<0.001), timely coronary angiography for non-STEMI (24.2% vs 36.7%; p<0.001), dual antiplatelet therapy (75.4% vs 78.7%) and secondary prevention therapies (87.2% vs 89.6% for statins, 82.5% vs 85.6% for ACE inhibitor/angiotensin receptor blockers and 62.6% vs 67.6% for beta-blockers; all p<0.001). Median 30-day Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events risk score adjusted mortality was higher for women than men (median: 5.2% (IQR 1.8%–13.1%) vs 2.3% (IQR 0.8%–7.1%), p<0.001). An estimated 8243 (95% CI 8111 to 8375) deaths among women could have been prevented over the study period if their quality indicator attainment had been equal to that attained by men.ConclusionAccording to the ESC ACCA AMI quality indicators, women in England and Wales less frequently received guideline-indicated care and had significantly higher mortality than men. Greater attention to the delivery of recommended AMI treatments for women has the potential to reduce the sex-AMI mortality gap.

No abstract

AimsTo investigate the application of the European Society of Cardiology Acute Cardiovascular Care Association quality indicators (QI) for acute myocardial infarction for the study of hospital performance and 30-day mortality.Methods and resultsNational cohort study (n = 118,075 patients, n = 211 hospitals, MINAP registry), 2012-13. Overall, 16 of the 20 QIs could be calculated. Eleven QIs had a significant inverse association with GRACE risk adjusted 30-day mortality (all P < 0.005). The association with the greatest magnitude was high attainment of the composite opportunity-based QI (80-100%) vs. zero attainment (odds ratio 0.04, 95% confidence interval 0.04-0.05, P < 0.001), increasing attainment from low (0.42, 0.37- 0.49, P < 0.001) to intermediate (0.15, 0.13-0.16, P < 0.001) was significantly associated with a reduced risk of 30-day mortality. A 1% increase in attainment of this QI was associated with a 3% reduction in 30-day mortality (0.97, 0.97-0.97, P < 0.001). The QI with the widest hospital variation was ′fondaparinux received among NSTEMI′ (interquartile range 84.7%) and least variation ′centre organisation′ (0.0%), with seven QIs depicting minimal variation (<11%). GRACE risk score adjusted 30-day mortality varied by hospital (median 6.7%, interquartile range 5.4-7.9%).ConclusionsEleven QIs were significantly inversely associated with 30-day mortality. Increasing patient attainment of the composite quality indicator was the most powerful predictor; a 1% increase in attainment represented a 3% decrease in 30-day standardised mortality. The ESC QIs for acute myocardial infarction are applicable in a large health system and have the potential to improve care and reduce unwarranted variation in death from acute myocardial infarction.

AimsTo investigate whether improved survival from non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI), according to GRACE risk score, was associated with guideline-indicated treatments and diagnostics, and persisted after hospital discharge.Methods and resultsNational cohort study (n = 389 507 patients, n = 232 hospitals, MINAP registry), 2003–2013. The primary outcome was adjusted all-cause survival estimated using flexible parametric survival modelling with time-varying covariates. Optimal care was defined as the receipt of all eligible treatments and was inversely related to risk status (defined by the GRACE risk score): 25.6% in low, 18.6% in intermediate, and 11.5% in high-risk NSTEMI. At 30 days, the use of optimal care was associated with improved survival among high [adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) −0.66 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.53–0.86, difference in absolute mortality rate (AMR) per 100 patients (AMR/100–0.19 95% CI −0.29 to −0.08)], and intermediate (aHR = 0.74, 95% CI 0.62–0.92; AMR/100 = −0.15, 95% CI −0.23 to −0.08) risk NSTEMI. At the end of follow-up (8.4 years, median 2.3 years), the significant association between the use of all eligible guideline-indicated treatments and improved survival remained only for high-risk NSTEMI (aHR = 0.66, 95% CI 0.50–0.96; AMR/100 = −0.03, 95% CI −0.06 to −0.01). For low-risk NSTEMI, there was no association between the use of optimal care and improved survival at 30 days (aHR = 0.92, 95% CI 0.69–1.38) and at 8.4 years (aHR = 0.71, 95% CI 0.39–3.74).ConclusionOptimal use of guideline-indicated care for NSTEMI was associated with greater survival gains with increasing GRACE risk, but its use decreased with increasing GRACE risk.

Evidence from this study suggests that there is no association between β-blockers and all-cause mortality. A possible beneficial effect in AMI survivors needs to be tested by large randomised clinical trials.

Aims: Early and accurate diagnosis of acute myocardial infarction is central to successful treatment and improved outcomes. We aimed to investigate the impact of the initial hospital diagnosis on mortality for patients with acute myocardial infarction. Methods and results: Cohort study using data from the Myocardial Ischaemia National Audit Project of patients discharged with a final diagnosis of ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI, n=221,635) and non-STEMI (NSTEMI, n=342,777) between 1 April 2004 and 31 March 2013 in all acute hospitals (n = 243) in England and Wales. Overall, 168,534 (29.9%) patients had an initial diagnosis which was not the same as their final diagnosis. After multivariable adjustment, for STEMI a change from an initial diagnosis of NSTEMI (time ratio 0.97, 95% confidence interval 0.92-1.01) and chest pain of uncertain cause (0.98, 0.89-1.07) was not associated with a significant reduction in time to death, whereas for other initial diagnoses the time to death was significantly reduced by 21% (0.78, 0.74-0.83). For NSTEMI, after multivariable adjustment, a change from an initial diagnosis of STEMI was associated with a reduction in time to death of 10% (time ratio 0.90, 95% confidence interval 0.83-0.97), but not for chest pain of uncertain cause (0.99, 0.96-1.02). Patients with NSTEMI who had other initial diagnoses had a significant 14% reduction in their time to death (time ratio 0.86, 95% confidence interval 0.84-0.88). STEMI and NSTEMI with other initial diagnoses had low rates of pre-hospital electrocardiograph (24.3% and 21.5%), aspirin on hospitalisation (61.6% and 48.5%), care by a cardiologist (60.0% and 51.5%), invasive coronary procedures (38.8 % and 29.2%), cardiac rehabilitation (68.9% and 62.6%) and guideline indicated medications at time of discharge from hospital. Had the 3.3% of patients with STEMI and 17.9% of NSTEMI who were admitted with other initial diagnoses received an initial diagnosis of STEMI and NSTEMI, then 33 and 218 deaths per year might have been prevented, respectively. Conclusion: Nearly one in three patients with acute myocardial infarction had other diagnoses at first medical contact, who less frequently received guideline indicated care and had significantly higher mortality rates. There is substantial potential, greater for NSTEMI than STEMI, to improve outcomes through earlier and more accurate diagnosis of acute myocardial infarction.