Efficacy and safety of out-of-hospital intravenous metoprolol administration in anterior ST-segment elevation acute myocardial infarction: insights from the METOCARD-CNIC trial

We seek to examine the efficacy and safety of prereperfusion emergency medical services (EMS)–administered intravenous metoprolol in anterior ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction patients undergoing eventual primary angioplasty. This is a prespecified subgroup analysis of the Effect of Metoprolol in Cardioprotection During an Acute Myocardial Infarction trial population, who all eventually received oral metoprolol within 12 to 24 hours. We studied patients receiving intravenous metoprolol by EMS and compared them with others treated by EMS but not receiving intravenous metoprolol. Outcomes included infarct size and left ventricular ejection fraction on cardiac magnetic resonance imaging at 1 week, and safety by measuring the incidence of the predefined combined endpoint (composite of death, malignant ventricular arrhythmias, advanced atrioventricular block, cardiogenic shock, or reinfarction) within the first 24 hours. From the total population of the trial (N=270), 147 patients (54%) were recruited during out-of-hospital assistance and transferred to the primary angioplasty center (74 intravenous metoprolol and 73 controls). Infarct size was smaller in patients receiving intravenous metoprolol compared with controls (23.4 [SD 15.0] versus 34.0 [SD 23.7] g; adjusted difference –11.4; 95% confidence interval [CI] –18.6 to –4.3). Left ventricular ejection fraction was higher in the intravenous metoprolol group (48.1% [SD 8.4%] versus 43.1% [SD 10.2%]; adjusted difference 5.0; 95% CI 1.6 to 8.4). Metoprolol administration did not increase the incidence of the prespecified safety combined endpoint: 6.8% versus 17.8% in controls (risk difference –11.1; 95% CI –21.5 to –0.6). Out-of-hospital administration of intravenous metoprolol by EMS within 4.5 hours of symptom onset in our subjects reduced infarct size and improved left ventricular ejection fraction with no excess of adverse events during the first 24 hours.

Valve surgery in active infective endocarditis: a simple score to predict in-hospital prognosis

Aims Surgery for infective endocarditis (IE) is associated with high mortality. Our objectives were to describe the experience with surgical treatment for IE in Spain, and to identify predictors of in-hospital mortality. Methods Prospective cohort of 1000 consecutive patients with IE. Data were collected in 26 Spanish hospitals. Results Surgery was performed in 437 patients (43.7%). Patients treated with surgery were younger and predominantly male. They presented fewer comorbid conditions and more often had negative blood cultures and heart failure. In-hospital mortality after surgery was lower than in the medical therapy group (24.3 vs 30.7%, p = 0.02). In patients treated with surgery, endocarditis involved a native valve in 267 patients (61.1%), a prosthetic valve in 122 (27.9%), and a pacemaker lead with no clear further valve involvement in 48 (11.0%). The most common aetiologies were Staphylococcus (186, 42.6%), Streptococcus (97, 22.2%), and Enterococcus (49, 11.2%). The main indications for surgery were heart failure and severe valve regurgitation. A risk score for in-hospital mortality was developed using 7 prognostic variables with a similar predictive value (OR between 1.7 and 2.3): PALSUSE: prosthetic valve, age ≥ 70, large intracardiac destruction, Staphylococcus spp, urgent surgery, sex [female], EuroSCORE ≥ 10. In-hospital mortality ranged from 0% in patients with a PALSUSE score of 0 to 45.4% in patients with PALSUSE score > 3. Conclusions The prognosis of IE surgery is highly variable. The PALSUSE score could help to identify patients with higher in-hospital mortality.