| Autor: |
Monil Majmundar, Gabriel Ibarra, Ashish Kumar, Rajkumar Doshi, Palak Shah, Roxana Mehran, Grant W. Reed, Rishi Puri, Samir R. Kapadia, Sripal Bangalore, Ankur Kalra |
| Jazyk: |
angličtina |
| Rok vydání: |
2022 |
| Předmět: |
|
| Zdroj: |
Journal of the American Heart Association: Cardiovascular and Cerebrovascular Disease, Vol 11, Iss 12 (2022) |
| Druh dokumentu: |
article |
| ISSN: |
2047-9980 |
| DOI: |
10.1161/JAHA.121.025205 |
| Popis: |
Background The role of invasive management compared with medical management in patients with non–ST‐segment–elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) and advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD) is uncertain, given the increased risk of procedural complications in patients with CKD. We aimed to compare clinical outcomes of invasive management with medical management in patients with NSTEMI‐CKD. Methods and Results We identified NSTEMI and CKD stages 3, 4, 5, and end‐stage renal disease admissions using International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD‐10‐CM) codes from the Nationwide Readmission Database 2016 to 2018. Patients were stratified into invasive and medical management. Primary outcome was mortality (in‐hospital and 6 months after discharge). Secondary outcomes were in‐hospital postprocedural complications (acute kidney injury requiring dialysis, major bleeding) and postdischarge 6‐month safety and major adverse cardiovascular events. Out of 141 052 patients with NSTEMI‐CKD, 85 875 (60.9%) were treated with invasive management, whereas 55 177 (39.1%) patients were managed medically. In propensity‐score matched cohorts, invasive strategy was associated with lower in‐hospital (CKD 3: odds ratio [OR], 0.47 [95% CI, 0.43–0.51]; P |
| Databáze: |
Directory of Open Access Journals |
| Externí odkaz: |
|
Plný text