Clinical Frailty Scale classes are independently associated with 6-month mortality for patients after acute myocardial infarction

Data on the prognostic value of frailty to guide clinical decision-making for patients with myocardial infarction (MI) are scarce. To analyse the association between frailty classification, treatment patterns, in-hospital outcomes, and 6-month mortality in a large population of patients with MI. An...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:European heart journal. Acute cardiovascular care 2022-02, Vol.11 (2), p.89-98
Hauptverfasser: Ekerstad, Niklas, Javadzadeh, Dariush, Alexander, Karen P, Bergström, Olle, Eurenius, Lars, Fredrikson, Mats, Gudnadottir, Gudny, Held, Claes, Ängerud, Karin Hellström, Jahjah, Radwan, Jernberg, Tomas, Mattsson, Ewa, Melander, Kjell, Mellbin, Linda, Ohlsson, Monica, Ravn-Fischer, Annica, Svennberg, Lars, Yndigegn, Troels, Alfredsson, Joakim
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Data on the prognostic value of frailty to guide clinical decision-making for patients with myocardial infarction (MI) are scarce. To analyse the association between frailty classification, treatment patterns, in-hospital outcomes, and 6-month mortality in a large population of patients with MI. An observational, multicentre study with a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data using the SWEDEHEART registry. In total, 3381 MI patients with a level of frailty assessed using the Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS-9) were included. Of these patients, 2509 (74.2%) were classified as non-vulnerable non-frail (CFS 1-3), 446 (13.2%) were vulnerable non-frail (CFS 4), and 426 (12.6%) were frail (CFS 5-9). Frailty and non-frail vulnerability were associated with worse in-hospital outcomes compared with non-frailty, i.e. higher rates of mortality (13.4% vs. 4.0% vs. 1.8%), cardiogenic shock (4.7% vs. 2.5% vs. 1.9%), and major bleeding (4.5% vs. 2.7% vs. 1.1%) (all P 
ISSN:2048-8726
2048-8734
2048-8734
DOI:10.1093/ehjacc/zuab114