BackgroundAcute myocardial infarction (AMI) is often present in old populations and rare in young people. Its incidence significantly increased recent years. The mechanism and disease course of AMI in young people are probably different from that in old population. The aim of this study was to analyze clinical risk factors of STEMI in young patients.MethodsData was collected from consecutive patients ≤ 44 years of age (young; n = 86) and 60–74 years of age (old; n = 65) diagnosed with STEMI, and 79 young age-matched patients without coronary artery disease (CAD), hospitalized between January 2009 and June 2013.ResultsThe young STEMI group had a significantly higher proportion of males (88.37 vs. 53.16%; P < 0.01), smokers (82.56 vs. 49.37%; P < 0.01) and patients with a family history of early CAD (54.65 vs. 32.91%; P < 0.05) than age-matched controls. Young STEMI patients also had significantly higher levels of fasting blood sugar (6.39 vs. 5.25 mmol/L; P < 0.001), glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) (6.26 vs. 5.45%; P < 0.05), total cholesterol (5.14 vs. 4.65 mmol/L, P < 0.05), and fibrinogen (Fib) (3.39 vs. 2.87; P < 0.01). Compared with the old STEMI group, young STEMI patients had significantly higher proportions of males (88.37 vs. 63.08%; P < 0.01) smokers (82.56 vs. 41.54%; P < 0.01), and those with a family history of early CAD (54.65 vs. 18.46%; P < 0.01). Young STEMI patients also lower Fib (3.39 vs. 3.88 g/L; P < 0.01), less frequent occurrence of angina pectoris before STEMI (13.95 vs. 29.23%; P < 0.05) compared with the old STEMI group. Logistic regression analysis indicated that male sex (OR = 5.891), smoking (OR = 3.500), family history of early CAD (OR = 3.194), Fib (OR = 2.414) and HbA1c (OR = 1.515) are associated with STEMI in young patients.ConclusionIn addition to previously recognized risk factors (male sex, smoking and family history of early CAD), Fib and HbA1c are associated with STEMI in individuals ≤ 44 years of age without antecedent angina pectoris.

Background: The Shexiang Baoxin Pill (MUSKARDIA) has been used for treating coronary artery disease (CAD) and angina for more than 30 years in China. Nevertheless, methodologically sound trials on the use of MUSKARDIA in CAD patients are scarce. The aim of the study is to determine the effects of MUSKARDIA as an add-on to optimal medical therapy (OMT) in patients with stable CAD. Methods: A total of 2674 participants with stable CAD from 97 hospitals in China were randomized 1:1 to a MUSKARDIA or placebo group for 24 months. Both groups received OMT according to local tertiary hospital protocols. The primary outcome was the occurrence of a major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE), defined as a composite of cardiovascular death, non-fatal myocardial infarction (MI), or non-fatal stroke. Secondary outcomes included all-cause mortality, non-fatal MI, non-fatal stroke, hospitalization for unstable angina or heart failure, peripheral revascularization, angina stability and angina frequency. Results: In all, 99.7% of the patients were treated with aspirin and 93.0% with statin. After 2 years of treatment, the occurrence of MACEs was reduced by 26.9% in the MUSKARDIA group (MUSKARDIA: 1.9% vs. placebo: 2.6%; odds ratio = 0.80; 95% confidence interval: 0.45–1.07; P  = 0.2869). Angina frequency was significantly reduced in the MUSKARDIA group at 18 months (P = 0.0362). Other secondary endpoints were similar between the two groups. The rates of adverse events were also similar between the two groups (MUSKARDIA: 17.7% vs. placebo: 17.4%, P = 0.8785). Conclusions: As an add-on to OMT, MUSKARDIA is safe and significantly reduces angina frequency in patients with stable CAD. Moreover, the use of MUSKARDIA is associated with a trend toward reduced MACEs in patients with stable CAD. The results suggest that MUSKARDIA can be used to manage patients with CAD. Trial registration chictr.org.cn, No. ChiCTR-TRC-12003513

No abstract

Background: Compared with a classic wrist puncture for radial artery catheterization, a distal radial artery puncture has the advantage of reducing the incidence of radial artery occlusion in anatomic and physiological procedures. This study aimed to explore the difference in clinical effects between the distal radial artery and classic radial artery approaches in percutaneous coronary intervention.Methods: A total of 620 patients who underwent coronary angiography and/or percutaneous coronary intervention in our hospital from December 2017 to December 2018 were enrolled in this study. These patients were divided into two groups based on the puncture site: a distal radial artery group and a classic radial artery group. There were 312 patients in the radial artery group and 308 patients in the classic radial artery group. The puncture time, puncture success rate, surgery time, implanted stents, puncture site hemorrhage, hematoma, aneurysm, and iliac artery occlusion rate were observed.Results: There was no significant difference in puncture time, puncture success rate, surgery time, implanted stent, puncture site hemorrhage, hematoma and aneurysm (P>0.05), while the radial artery occlusion rate was lower in the distal radial artery group, and the difference was statistically significant (P<0.05). Conclusions:The results of this study showed that the distal radial artery approach had a lower rate of brachial artery occlusion, indicating that it could be used as an alternative to the classic radial artery approach.

Background:There has been no external validation of survival prediction models for severe adult respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) therapy in China. The aim of study was to compare the performance of multiple models recently developed for patients with ARDS undergoing ECMO based on Chinese single-center data.Methods:A retrospective case study was performed, including twenty-three severe ARDS patients who received ECMO from January 2009 to July 2015. The PRESERVE (Predicting death for severe ARDS on VV-ECMO), ECMOnet, Respiratory Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Survival Prediction (RESP) score, a center-specific model developed for inter-hospital transfers receiving ECMO, and the classical risk-prediction scores of Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) II and Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) were calculated. In-hospital and six-month mortality were regarded as the endpoints and model performance was evaluated by comparing the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC).Results:The RESP and APACHE II scores showed excellent discriminate performance in predicting survival with AUC of 0.835 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.659–1.010, P = 0.007) and 0.762 (95% CI, 0.558–0.965, P = 0.035), respectively. The optimal cutoff values were risk class 3.5 for RESP and 35.5 for APACHE II score, and both showed 70.0% sensitivity and 84.6% specificity. The excellent performance of these models was also evident for the pneumonia etiological subgroup, for which the SOFA score was also shown to be predictive, with an AUC of 0.790 (95% CI, 0.571–1.009, P = 0.038). However, the ECMOnet and the score developed for externally retrieved ECMO patients failed to demonstrate significant discriminate power for the overall cohort. The PRESERVE model was unable to be evaluated fully since only one patient died six months postdischarge.Conclusions:The RESP, APCHAE II, and SOFA scorings systems show good predictive value for intra-hospital survival of ARDS patients treated with ECMO in our single-center evaluation. Future validation should include a larger study with either more patients’ data at single-center or by integration of domestic multi-center data. Development of a scoring system with national characteristics might be warranted.