Skip to main content

29.06.2020 | Original Article | Ausgabe 12/2020

Heart and Vessels 12/2020

Clinical profiles and outcomes in the treatment of acute myocardial infarction in Japan of aging society

Heart and Vessels > Ausgabe 12/2020
Makoto Suzuki, Kensaku Nishihira, Misa Takegami, Satoshi Honda, Sunao Kojima, Morimasa Takayama, Tetsuya Sumiyoshi, Hisao Ogawa, Kazuo Kimura, Satoshi Yasuda, on behalf of the JAMIR Investigators
Wichtige Hinweise

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​s00380-020-01654-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
The members of the JAMIR Investigators group mentioned in Acknowledgements section.

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.


To address many uncertainties in the acute care of patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) in proportion to increasing age, we underwent the nationwide current survey consisted of 11,676 patients with AMI based on the database of the Japanese Acute Myocardial Infarction Registry between January 2011 and December 2013 to figure out how difference of clinical profiles and outcomes between coronary revascularization and conservative treatments for AMI. Clinical profiles in a total of 763 patients with AMI with conservative treatments (7% of all) were characterized as more elderly women (median age, 71 yeas vs. 68 years, p < 0.0001, male, 71% vs. 76%, p = 0.0008), high Killip class (Killip class I, 61% vs. 75%, p < 0.0001), and non-ST-segment elevation AMI (37% vs. 27%, p < 0.0001) as compared with 10,913 with coronary revascularization, with a consequence of more than twofold higher in-hospital mortality (12% vs. 5%, p < 0.0001). When compared with conservative treatments, highly effective of coronary revascularization to decrease in-hospital mortality was found in patients with ST-segment elevation AMI (6% vs. 16%, p < 0.0001), while these advantages were not evident in those with non-ST-segment elevation AMI (4% vs. 6%, p = 0.1107), especially with high Killip class, regardless of whether or not propensity score matching of clinical characteristics. A risk-adapted allocation of invasive management therefore may have the potential of benefiting patients with non-ST-segment elevation AMI, in particular elders.

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten

e.Med Interdisziplinär

Für Ihren Erfolg in Klinik und Praxis - Die beste Hilfe in Ihrem Arbeitsalltag als Mediziner

Mit e.Med Interdisziplinär erhalten Sie Zugang zu allen CME-Fortbildungen und Fachzeitschriften auf

Nur für berechtigte Nutzer zugänglich
Über diesen Artikel

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 12/2020

Heart and Vessels 12/2020 Zur Ausgabe

Neu im Fachgebiet Kardiologie

Mail Icon II Newsletter

Bestellen Sie unseren kostenlosen Newsletter Update Kardiologie und bleiben Sie gut informiert – ganz bequem per eMail.