Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Management of Acute Myocardial Infarction Minimal Acceptable vs Optimal Care Hussien H. Rizk, MD Cairo University.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Management of Acute Myocardial Infarction Minimal Acceptable vs Optimal Care Hussien H. Rizk, MD Cairo University."— Presentation transcript:

1 Management of Acute Myocardial Infarction Minimal Acceptable vs Optimal Care Hussien H. Rizk, MD Cairo University

2 Background Suspicious chest pain: extremely common cause of ER visits Acute MI: the most costly cardiac cause of ER visits 5-10% of acute MI patients are missed because of errors in symptom interpretation or missed ECG diagnosis Many patients do not receive proven inexpensive effective therapy

3 Clinical proceedings of a suspected MI Symptom evaluation –Pain characteristics –Heart failure, syncope –Contraindication to SK Physical examination ECG –Quick –Interpretation correct Lab work-up –Basic [Sugar. CRT. K. CK if no ST elevation] –CXR –Specific [Clinically guided] Disposal: –Discharge –Observation –Admission –Referral Relief of symptoms –Pain –Nausea –Anxiety Aspirin –Saves as many lives as SK ACE-I –Low dose [Captopril 6.25] –Not if SBP<100 BB Thrombolysis –SK –TPA: SK sensitive or recent use Primary PCI: –Who? Where?

4 Should everybody with acute MI have: Statin? Clopedogrel? Platelet GP II b/III a inhibitor? Primary PCI?

5 Timing of Statin Therapy Initiation After ACS in Recent Clinical Studies Days Secondary prevention 06 Months 3 2 L-CAD CARE LIPID 24 Hours 10 6 8 12 184 MIRACL 4S 6 Atorvastatin Pravastatin Simvastatin PROVE IT WOSCOPS Primary prevention ACS Fluvastatin FLORIDA

6 MIRACL Study Outcome Measures Primary –Death, Non-fatal MI, Cardiac arrest –Worsening angina + evidence of myocardial ischemia. Secondary –Stroke –Revascularization. –Worsening CHF –Worsening angina without evidence of ischemia Schwartz GG et al. JAMA 2001;255:1711

7 Time Since Randomisation (Weeks) 0481216 15 10 5 0 Placebo 17.4% Atorvastatin 14.8% Risk reduction = 16% P=0.048 95% CI = 0.701–0.999 Time to first occurrence of composite endpoint of: n Death (any cause) n Non-fatal MI n Resuscitated cardiac arrest n Worsening angina with new objective evidence and urgent rehospitalisation Schwartz GG et al. JAMA 2001;255:1711-8. MIRACL: Primary Efficacy Measure Cumulative Incidence (%) Placebo 8.4% Atorvastatin 6.2% MIRACL Worsening Angina with New Objective Evidence of Ischemia Requiring Urgent Hospitalisation Risk reduction = 26% P=0.02

8 MIRACL: COST-BENEFIT Absolute risk reduction for worsening angina: 2.2% NNT = 100/2.2 = 45.5 Cost of avoiding one worsening angina event = NNT x No of Days x Daily cost (Ignoring lab tests & treating complications) = 45.5 x 120 X 36 = 196,364 LE

9 GP II b/III a inhibitors for medically treated acute coronary syndromes GUSTO 4-ACS: Abciximab, no acute revascularization. No benefit at 30D (Simoons. Lancet 2001;357:1915) or 1Y (Ottervanger et al. CIRCULATION 2003;107:437) GRAPE pilot: abciximab for acute MI: TIMI 3 flow in 20% (van der Merkhof et al. JACC 1999;33:1528) PRISM: Tirofiban reduced total mortality compared to heparin alone.

10 Tirofiban in ACS: 1.5% ARR of 30D mortality compared to heparin alone PRISM. NEJM 1998;338:1498 NNT = 67 Cost/event = LE 130,000

11 PRISM PLUS: terminated prematurely for excess mortality with tirofiban (4.6% vs 1.1% for heparin alone)

12

13 DANAMI-2 COST-BENEFIT 6% Absolute risk reduction NNT = 16.7 Procedure cost: LE 14,000 Cost of preventing ONE EVENT (MI) at 30D = LE 233,800

14 MINIMAL ACCEPTABLE CARE FOR MI CLINICAL TRAINING COST-EFFECTIVE ROUTINE LAB: FBS. BUN. K. CK. CXR ROUTINE Rx. SYMPTOMS. ASA. SK. BB. ACE-I NOT ROUTINE: –TPA –CLOPEDOGREL –STATIN –PLATELET GLYCOPROTEIN INHIBITORS –PRIMARY PCI


Download ppt "Management of Acute Myocardial Infarction Minimal Acceptable vs Optimal Care Hussien H. Rizk, MD Cairo University."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google