학술논문

The Impact of Atrial Fibrillation on In-Hospital Outcomes in Patients With Acute Myocardial Infarction Complicated by Cardiogenic Shock Undergoing Coronary Revascularization with Percutaneous Ventricular Assist Device Support.
Document Type
Article
Source
JAFIB: Journal of Atrial Fibrillation. Feb/Mar2020, Vol. 12 Issue 5, p1-8. 8p.
Subject
*INTRA-aortic balloon counterpulsation
*HEART assist devices
*ATRIAL fibrillation
*CARDIOGENIC shock
*MYOCARDIAL infarction
*NURSING care facilities
Language
ISSN
1941-6911
Abstract
Background: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is common in acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock (AMI-CS) requiring percutaneous ventricular assist device (pVAD-Impella®) support during percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI). We evaluated the effects of a coexistent diagnosis of AF on clinical outcomes in patients with AMI-CS undergoing PCI with pVAD support. Methods: The National Inpatient Sample (2008-2014) was queried to identify patients with AMICS requiring PCI with pVAD support and had a concomitant diagnosis of AF. Propensity-matched cohorts (AF+ vs AF-) were compared for in-hospital outcomes. Results: A total of 840 patients with AMICS requiring PCI with pVAD support (420 AF+ vs 420 AF-) were identified in the matched cohort. Patients with AF were older (mean 69.7±12.0 vs 67.9±11.3 yrs, p=0.030). All-cause in-hospital mortality rates between the two groups were similar (40.5% vs 36.7%, p=0.245); however, higher postprocedural respiratory complications (9.5% vs 4.8%, p=0.007) were seen in AF+ group. In-hospital cardiac arrests were more frequent in the AF- group (32.0% vs 19.2%, p<0.001). We examined the length of stay (LOS), transfer to other facilities, and hospital charges as metrics of health care resource consumption and found that the AF+ cohort experienced fewer routine discharges (13.1% vs 30.2%), more frequent transfers to other facilities including skilled nursing facilities or intermediate care facilities (27.3% vs 17.8%; p<0.001), more frequently required the use of home health care (14.3% vs 7.1%; p<0.001). The mean LOS (11.9±10.1 vs 9.11±6.8, p<0.001) and hospital charges ($308,478 vs $277,982, p=0.008) were higher in the AF+ group. Conclusion: In patients suffering AMICS requiring PCI and pVAD support, a coexistent diagnosis of AF was not associated with an increase in all-cause in-hospital mortality as compared to patients without AF. However, healthcare resource consumption as assessed by various metrics was consistently greater in the AF+ group. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]