Myocardial salvage and infarct characteristics in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction classified by ORBI risk score

Abstract Background The Observatoire Régional Breton sur l'Infarctus (ORBI) [1] risk score was developed to predict in-hospital cardiogenic shock (CS) development in patients with ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) treated with primary percutaneous coronary intervention. The association...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:European heart journal 2023-11, Vol.44 (Supplement_2)
Main Authors: Bo Kunkel, J, Frydland, M, Nepper-Christensen, L, Engstroem, T, Holle, S, Pecini, R, Holmvang, L, Hassager, C, Loenborg, J, Soeholm, H
Format: Article
Language:English
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Abstract Background The Observatoire Régional Breton sur l'Infarctus (ORBI) [1] risk score was developed to predict in-hospital cardiogenic shock (CS) development in patients with ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) treated with primary percutaneous coronary intervention. The association between infarct characteristics determined by cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) and ORBI risk classification have not previously been reported in patients with STEMI. Methods The Third DANish Study of Optimal Acute Treatment of Patients With ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction (DANAMI 3) trial investigated multiple revascularization strategies in patients with STEMI. CS on admission was an exclusion criterion, thus only low and intermediate scores were included. Stratification into ‘low’ (0-7) and ‘intermediate-high’ (>=8) ORBI risk score was performed (n=1,396), and CMR data from admission and three months follow-up at the largest participating centre were analysed using logistic- and Cox-regression (n=534, 38%). Results A total of 1,149 (82%) were ‘low’ risk, and 247 (18%) ‘intermediate-high’ risk. Patients with ‘intermediate-high’ risk were older (median age 71 (interquartile range (IQR) 61-78) vs. 60 (52-68), p 100 bpm (30% vs. 5%, p
ISSN:0195-668X
1522-9645
DOI:10.1093/eurheartj/ehad655.1530