# Review of the Association Between Long-Term and Current Systemic Steroid Use With Electromechanical Complications and Inpatient Mortality After ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction

## TL;DR

This study examines how long-term steroid use affects outcomes in patients who have had a severe heart attack, finding some benefits but no significant impact on mortality.

## Contribution

The study is the first to extensively analyze the association between long-term steroid use and electromechanical complications after STEMI.

## Key findings

- LTCSS use was linked to lower odds of electrical dysfunction and hemodynamic instability.
- Patients on LTCSS had shorter hospital stays and lower total charges.
- No significant differences were found in mortality or mechanical complications.

## Abstract

Background

The impact of long-term systemic steroid use on electrical and mechanical complications following ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) has not been extensively studied.

Methods

In a retrospective cohort study of the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) from 2018 to 2020, adults admitted with STEMI were dichotomized based on the presence of long-term (current) systemic steroid (LTCSS) use. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes included a composite of mechanical complications, electrical, hemodynamic, and thrombotic complications, as well as revascularization complexity, length of stay (LOS), and total charge. Multivariate linear and logistic regressions were used to adjust for confounders.

Results

Out of 608,210 admissions for STEMI, 5,310 (0.9%) had LTCSS use. There was no significant difference in the odds of all-cause mortality (aOR: 0.89, 95%CI: 0.74-1.08, p-value: 0.245) and the composite of mechanical complications (aOR: 0.74, 95%CI: 0.25-2.30, p-value: 0.599). LTCSS use was associated with lower odds of ventricular tachycardia, atrioventricular blocks, new permanent-pacemaker insertion, cardiogenic shock, the need for mechanical circulatory support, mechanical ventilation, cardioversion, a reduced LOS by 1 day, and a reduced total charge by 34,512 USD (all p-values: <0.05). There were no significant differences in the revascularization strategy (coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) vs. percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI)) or in the incidence of composite thrombotic events.

Conclusion

LTCSS use among patients admitted with STEMI was associated with lower odds of electrical dysfunction and hemodynamic instability but no difference in the odds of mechanical complications, CABG rate, all-cause mortality, cardiac arrest, or thrombotic complications. Further prospective studies are needed to evaluate these findings further.