It appears you don't have support to open PDFs in this web browser. To view this file, Open with your PDF reader
Abstract
Background
There are limited epidemiological data on acute respiratory failure (ARF) in cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction (AMI-CS). This study sought to evaluate the prevalence and outcomes of ARF in AMI-CS.
Methods
This was a retrospective study of AMI-CS admissions during 2000–2014 from the National Inpatient Sample. Administrative codes for ARF and mechanical ventilation (MV) were used to define the cohorts of no ARF, ARF without MV and ARF with MV. Admissions with a secondary diagnosis of AMI and with chronic MV were excluded. Outcomes of interest included in-hospital mortality, temporal trends of ARF prevalence and resource utilization.
Measurements and main results
During 2000–2014, 439,436 admissions for AMI-CS met the inclusion criteria. ARF and MV were noted in 57% and 43%, respectively. Admissions with non-ST-elevation AMI-CS, of non-White race and with non-private insurance received MV more frequently. Noninvasive ventilation and invasive MV increased from 0.4% and 39.2% (2000) to 3.6% and 46.4% (2014), respectively (p < 0.001). Coronary angiography and percutaneous coronary intervention were used less frequently in admissions receiving ARF with MV. Compared to admissions with no ARF, ARF without MV (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 1.56 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.53–1.59]; p < 0.001) and ARF with MV (aOR 2.50 [95% CI 2.47–2.54]; p < 0.001) were associated with higher in-hospital mortality. Admissions with ARF without MV had greater resource utilization and lesser discharges to home as compared to no ARF.
Conclusions
In this contemporary AMI-CS cohort, the presence of ARF and MV use was noted in 57% and 43%, respectively, and was associated with higher in-hospital mortality.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Details

1 Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA; Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
2 Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA; Division of Nephrology and Hypertension, Department of Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
3 Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA; Department of Health Science Research, Robert D. and Patricia E. Kern Center for the Science of Health Care Delivery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
4 Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
5 Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
6 Division of Hospital Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA