Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2016 May;109(5):303-10.
doi: 10.1016/j.acvd.2016.01.012. Epub 2016 Apr 20.

Prognosis and management of myocardial infarction: Comparisons between the French FAST-MI 2010 registry and the French public health database

Grégoire Massoullié  1 , Jérome Wintzer-Wehekind  1 , Chouki Chenaf  2 , Aurélien Mulliez  3 , Bruno Pereira  3 , Nicolas Authier  2 , Alain Eschalier  2 , Guillaume Clerfond  1 , Géraud Souteyrand  1 , Simon Tabassome  4 , Nicolas Danchin  5 , Bernard Citron  1 , Jean-René Lusson  1 , Étienne Puymirat  5 , Pascal Motreff  1 , Romain Eschalier  6
Affiliations
Free article
Comparative Study

Prognosis and management of myocardial infarction: Comparisons between the French FAST-MI 2010 registry and the French public health database

Grégoire Massoullié et al. Arch Cardiovasc Dis. 2016 May.
Free article

Abstract

Background: Multicentre registries of myocardial infarction management show a steady improvement in prognosis and greater access to myocardial revascularization in a more timely manner. While French registries are the standard references, the question arises: are data stemming solely from the activity of French cardiac intensive care units (ICUs) a true reflection of the entire French population with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI)?

Aim: To compare data on patients hospitalized for STEMI from two French registries: the French registry of acute ST-elevation or non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction (FAST-MI) and the Échantillon généraliste des bénéficiaires (EGB) database.

Methods: We compared patients treated for STEMI listed in the FAST-MI 2010 registry (n=1716) with those listed in the EGB database, which comprises a sample of 1/97th of the French population, also from 2010 (n=403).

Results: Compared with the FAST-MI 2010 registry, the EGB database population were older (67.2±15.3 vs 63.3±14.5 years; P<0.001), had a higher percentage of women (36.0% vs 24.7%; P<0.001), were less likely to undergo emergency coronary angiography (75.2% vs 96.3%; P<0.001) and were less often treated in university hospitals (27.1% vs 37.0%; P=0.001). There were no significant differences between the two registries in terms of cardiovascular risk factors, comorbidities and drug treatment at admission. Thirty-day mortality was higher in the EGB database (10.2% vs 4.4%; P<0.001).

Conclusions: Registries such as FAST-MI are indispensable, not only for assessing epidemiological changes over time, but also for evaluating the prognostic effect of modern STEMI management. Meanwhile, exploitation of data from general databases, such as EGB, provides additional relevant information, as they include a broader population not routinely admitted to cardiac ICUs.

Keywords: Epidemiology; Management; Prise en charge; Prognosis; Pronostique; STEMI; Therapeutics; Thérapeutique; Épidémiologie.

PubMed Disclaimer