CLINICAL STUDIES
Acute myocardial infarction occurring in versus out of the hospital: patient characteristics and clinical outcome
Ralf Zahn, MD*,
Rudolf Schiele, MDa,
Karlheinz Seidl, MDa,
Thomas Kapp, MD*,
Hans Georg Glunz, MD ,
Edwin Jagodzinski, MD ,
Thomas Voigtländer, MD ,
Martin Gottwik, MD||,
Gunther Berg, MD¶,
Helmut Thomas, MD#,
Jochen Senges, MDa for the Maximal Individual TheRapy in Acute Myocardial Infarction (MITRA) Study Group
a Herzzentrum Ludwigshafen, Bad Dürkheim, Germany
* Vincentius Krankenhaus Speyer, Bad Dürkheim, Germany
Westpfalz-Klinikum Kaiserslautern, Bad Dürkheim, Germany
Marienkrankenhaus Ludwigshafen, Bad Dürkheim, Germany
Johannes Gutenberg Universität Mainz, Bad Dürkheim, Germany
|| Klinikum Nürnberg, Bad Dürkheim, Germany
¶ Universitätsklinikum Homburg/Saar, Bad Dürkheim, Germany
# Evangelisches Krankenhaus, Bad Dürkheim, Germany
Manuscript received October 8, 1999;
revised manuscript received December 16, 1999,
accepted February 9, 2000.
Reprint requests and correspondence: Dr. Ralf Zahn, Herzzentrum Ludwigshafen, Department of Cardiology, Bremserstrasse 79, D-67063 Ludwigshafen, Germany erzahn{at}aol.com
OBJECTIVES
We describe the baseline characteristics and clinical course of patients who had an acute myocardial infarction (AMI) during their hospital stay.
BACKGROUND
In comparison with patients who had an AMI outside of the hospital (prehospital AMI), the data on patients who had an AMI in the hospital are poorly described.
METHODS
Patients with an in-hospital AMI were prospectively registered in the Southwest German Maximal Individual TheRapy in Acute myocardial infarction (MITRA) study and compared with patients with prehospital AMI.
RESULTS
Of 5,888 patients with AMI, 403 patients (6.8%) had an in-hospital AMI. These patients were older, more often male and sicker as compared with the patients with a prehospital AMI. They also showed a higher prevalence of concomitant diseases, such as arterial hypertension, diabetes mellitus, renal insufficiency and contraindications for thrombolysis. There was no significant difference regarding the use of reperfusion therapy, either thrombolysis (in-hospital AMI 44.2% vs. prehospital AMI 49.1%; odds ratio [OR] 0.86, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.70 to 1.05) or primary angioplasty (9.9% vs. 8.2%; OR 1.23, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.73), or a combination of both, between the two groups. The interval from symptom onset to the start of treatment in patients receiving reperfusion therapy was 55 min for patients with an in-hospital AMI versus 180 min for patients with a prehospital AMI (p = 0.001). In-hospital death occurred in 110 (27.3%) of 403 patients with an in-hospital versus 762 (13.9%) of 5,485 patients with a prehospital AMI (OR 2.33, 95% CI 1.85 to 2.94). This was confirmed by logistic regression analysis after adjusting for other confounding variables (OR 1.67, 95% CI 1.23 to 2.24).
CONCLUSIONS
In-hospital AMI occurred in 6.8% of patients. Time to intervention was shorter; however, the use of reperfusion therapy for in-hospital AMI was not different from that for prehospital AMI. In particular, primary angioplasty seems to be underused in these patients. This, as well as the selection of patients, may result in the high hospital mortality rate of 27.3%.
|
Abbreviations and Acronyms
| | AMI | = acute myocardial infarction | | CI | = confidence interval | | ECG | = electrocardiogram | | MITRA | = Maximal Individual TheRapy in Acute myocardial infarction study | | MONICA | = Multinational MONitoring of Trends and Determinants in CArdiovascular Disease | | OR | = odds ratio |
|
This article has been cited by other articles:

|
 |

|
 |
 
C. Maynard, E. Lowy, J. Rumsfeld, A. E. Sales, H. Sun, B. Kopjar, B. Fleming, R. L. Jesse, R. Rusch, and S. D. Fihn
The prevalence and outcomes of in-hospital acute myocardial infarction in the department of veterans affairs health system.
Arch Intern Med,
July 10, 2006;
166(13):
1410 - 1416.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|
|