Association of revascularisation with low mortality in non-ST elevation acute coronary syndrome, a report from GUSTO IV-ACS

Long-term ticagrelor for secondary prevention in patients with prior myocardial infarction and no history of coronary stenting: insights from PEGASUS-TIMI 54

Aims

PEGASUS-TIMI 54 demonstrated that long-term dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) with aspirin and ticagrelor reduced the risk of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), with an acceptable increase in bleeding, in patients with prior myocardial infarction (MI). While much of the discussion around prolonged DAPT has been focused on stented patients, patients with prior MI without prior coronary stenting comprise a clinically important subgroup.

Methods and results

This was a pre-specified analysis from PEGASUS-TIMI 54, which randomized 21 162 patients with prior MI (1–3 years) and additional high-risk features to ticagrelor 60 mg, 90 mg, or placebo twice daily in addition to aspirin. A total of 4199 patients had no history of coronary stenting at baseline. The primary efficacy outcome (MACE) was the composite of cardiovascular death, MI, or stroke. Patients without history of coronary stenting had higher baseline risk of MACE [13.2% vs. 8.0%, adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 1.41, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.15–1.73, in the placebo arm]. The relative risk reduction in MACE with ticagrelor (pooled doses) was similar in patients without (HR 0.82, 95% CI 0.68–0.99) and with prior stenting (HR 0.85, 95% CI 0.75–0.96; P for interaction = 0.76).

Conclusion

Long-term ticagrelor reduces thrombotic events in patients with prior MI regardless of whether they had prior coronary stenting. These data highlight the benefits of DAPT in prevention of spontaneous atherothrombotic events and indicate that long-term ticagrelor may be considered in high-risk patients with prior MI even if they have not been treated with stenting.

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier

NCT01225562.

Patients with non-ST segment elevation acute coronary syndromes managed without coronary revascularization: A population needing treatment improvement

NSTE-ACS patients are a heterogeneous population, with different clinical features and prognosis. A large proportion of them is medically managed, without any revascularization. In the EYSHOT and FAST-MI registries such patients were 40% and 35%, respectively. These patients are at higher risk of adverse cardiovascular events and have a worse prognosis compared with those receiving revascularization. Medically managed NSTE-ACS patients consist of different subgroups: those not undergoing coronary angiography, those without significant coronary artery disease, and those with coronary stenoses not referred to revascularization. Patients with NSTE-ACS for whom a conservative strategy without coronary angiogram is planned must be very carefully selected. In patients with comorbidities, frailty, or advanced age, a careful balance between benefits and risks is needed to choice the management strategy (perform or not coronary angiography and/or revascularization), as evidence-based medicine data are lacking in the setting of frailty and comorbidities. In this decisional process, it should be also taken into consideration the role of coronary anatomy in risk stratification and treatment guidance. NSTE-ACS patients managed without revascularization less frequently receive guideline-recommended pharmacological treatment. Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) is recommended for 12months also in medically managed patients, after careful balancing of ischemic and bleeding risk. In these patients it is mandatory to optimize pharmacological treatment, including antiplatelet therapy, to improve outcome. In NSTE-ACS medically managed, the proportion of patients discharged with DAPT should be increased in comparison with current practice, and the use of ticagrelor in place of clopidogrel should be considered in selected patients.

Early invasive versus initial conservative treatment strategies in octogenarians with UA/NSTEMI

BACKGROUND

Previous studies have demonstrated improved outcomes with an early invasive strategy in patients with unstable angina/non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction (UA/NSTEMI). However, there are limited data for patients ≥80 years of age in these studies.

METHODS

We used the 2003-2010 Nationwide Inpatient Sample databases to identify all patients ≥80 years of age (octogenarians) with UA/NSTEMI. Multivariable logistic regression was used to compare in-hospital outcomes in octogenarians with UA/NSTEMI undergoing early invasive (coronary angiography within 48 hours of admission, with or without revascularization) versus initial conservative treatment.

RESULTS

Among 968,542 octogenarians with UA/NSTEMI, 806,902 (83.3%) were managed using an initial conservative approach and 161,640 (16.7%) using an early invasive strategy. Patients in the early invasive group were more likely to be younger, men, white, and had a higher prevalence of smoking, dyslipidemia, obesity, hypertension, known coronary artery disease, carotid artery disease, and peripheral vascular disease. In-hospital mortality was significantly lower in octogenarians in the early invasive group (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 0.76; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.74-0.78). Early invasive strategy was associated with lower rates of acute ischemic stroke (adjusted OR 0.63; 95% CI, 0.60-0.66), intracranial hemorrhage (adjusted OR 0.60; 95% CI, 0.510.70), gastrointestinal bleeding (adjusted OR 0.63; 95% CI, 0.60-0.65), and shorter average length of stay (5.3 vs 5.8 days, P <.001), but higher cardiogenic shock (adjusted OR 2.14; 95% CI, 2.06-2.23) and total hospital cost (23,584 vs 13,278 USD).

CONCLUSION

Compared with an initial conservative approach, an early invasive strategy in octogenarians with UA/NSTEMI was associated with lower in-hospital mortality, acute ischemic stroke, intracranial hemorrhage, gastrointestinal bleeding, and shorter length of stay, but higher cardiogenic shock and total hospital cost.

Do observational studies using propensity score methods agree with randomized trials? A systematic comparison of studies on acute coronary syndromes

AIMS

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are the gold standard for assessing the efficacy of therapeutic interventions because randomization protects from biases inherent in observational studies. Propensity score (PS) methods, proposed as a potential solution to confounding of the treatment-outcome association, are widely used in observational studies of therapeutic interventions for acute coronary syndromes (ACS). We aimed to systematically assess agreement between observational studies using PS methods and RCTs on therapeutic interventions for ACS.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We searched for observational studies of interventions for ACS that used PS methods to estimate treatment effects on short- or long-term mortality. Using a standardized algorithm, we matched observational studies to RCTs based on patients' characteristics, interventions, and outcomes ('topics'), and we compared estimates of treatment effect between the two designs. When multiple observational studies or RCTs were identified for the same topic, we performed a meta-analysis and used the summary relative risk for comparisons. We matched 21 observational studies investigating 17 distinct clinical topics to 63 RCTs (median = 3 RCTs per observational study) for short-term (7 topics) and long-term (10 topics) mortality. Estimates from PS analyses differed statistically significantly from randomized evidence in two instances; however, observational studies reported more extreme beneficial treatment effects compared with RCTs in 13 of 17 instances (P = 0.049). Sensitivity analyses limited to large RCTs, and using alternative meta-analysis models yielded similar results.

CONCLUSION

For the treatment of ACS, observational studies using PS methods produce treatment effect estimates that are of more extreme magnitude compared with those from RCTs, although the differences are rarely statistically significant.

Ticagrelor versus clopidogrel in patients with acute coronary syndromes intended for non-invasive management: substudy from prospective randomised PLATelet inhibition and patient Outcomes (PLATO) trial

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate efficacy and safety outcomes in patients in the PLATelet inhibition and patient Outcomes (PLATO) trial who at randomisation were planned for a non-invasive treatment strategy.

DESIGN

Pre-specified analysis of pre-randomisation defined subgroup of prospective randomised clinical trial.

SETTING

862 centres in 43 countries.

PARTICIPANTS

5216 (28%) of 18,624 patients admitted to hospital for acute coronary syndrome who were specified as planned for non-invasive management.

INTERVENTIONS

Randomised treatment with ticagrelor (n=2601) versus clopidogrel (2615).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

Primary composite end point of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, and stroke; their individual components; and PLATO defined major bleeding during one year.

RESULTS

2183 (41.9%) patients had coronary angiography during their initial hospital admission, 1065 (20.4%) had percutaneous coronary intervention, and 208 (4.0%) had coronary artery bypass surgery. Cumulatively, 3143 (60.3%) patients had been managed non-invasively by the end of follow-up. The incidence of the primary end point was lower with ticagrelor than with clopidogrel (12.0% (n=295) v 14.3% (346); hazard ratio 0.85, 95% confidence interval 0.73 to 1.00; P=0.04). Overall mortality was also lower (6.1% (147) v 8.2% (195); 0.75, 0.61 to 0.93; P=0.01). The incidence of total major bleeding (11.9% (272) v 10.3% (238); 1.17, 0.98 to 1.39; P=0.08) and non-coronary artery bypass grafting related major bleeding (4.0% (90) v 3.1% (71); 1.30, 0.95 to 1.77; P=0.10) was numerically higher with ticagrelor than with clopidogrel.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with acute coronary syndrome initially intended for non-invasive management, the benefits of ticagrelor over clopidogrel were consistent with those from the overall PLATO results, indicating the broad benefits of P2Y12 inhibition with ticagrelor regardless of intended management strategy.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinical trials NCT00391872.

Management patterns of non-ST segment elevation acute coronary syndromes in relation to prior coronary revascularization

BACKGROUND

Contemporary guidelines support an early invasive strategy for non-ST elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS) patients who had prior coronary revascularization. However, little is known about the management pattern of these patients in "real world."

METHODS

We analyzed 3 consecutive Canadian registries (ACS I, ACS II, and Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events [GRACE]/expanded-GRACE) that recruited 12,483 NSTE-ACS patients from June 1999 to December 2007. We stratified the study population according to prior coronary revascularization status into 4 groups and compared their clinical characteristics, in-hospital use of medications, and cardiac procedures.

RESULTS

Of the 12,483 NSTE-ACS patients, 71.2% had no prior revascularization, 14.2% had percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) only, 9.5% had coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG) only, and 5% had both PCI and CABG. Compared to their counterparts without prior revascularization, patients with previous PCI and/or CABG were more likely to be male, to have diabetes, myocardial infarction, and heart failure but less likely to have ST-segment deviation or positive cardiac biomarker on presentation. Early use of evidence-based medications was higher among patients with previous PCI only and lower among patients with previous CABG only. After adjusting for possible confounders including GRACE risk score, prior PCI was independently associated with in-hospital use of cardiac catheterization (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 1.18, 95% CI 1.04-1.34, P = .008). In contrast, previous CABG was an independent negative predictor (adjusted OR .77, 95% CI 0.68-0.87, P < .001). There was no significant interaction (P = .93) between previous PCI and CABG.

CONCLUSIONS

The NSTE-ACS patients with previous PCI were more likely to be treated invasively. Conversely, patients with prior CABG less frequently received invasive therapy. Future studies should determine the appropriateness of this treatment discrepancy.

Impact of an initial strategy of medical therapy without percutaneous coronary intervention in high-risk patients from the Clinical Outcomes Utilizing Revascularization and Aggressive DruG Evaluation (COURAGE) trial

We explored the safety and quality-of-life consequences of treating patients with stable coronary disease and high-risk features initially with optimal medical therapy (OMT) alone compared to OMT plus percutaneous coronary intervention. This was a post hoc analysis of Clinical Outcomes Utilizing Revascularization and Aggressive DruG Evaluation (COURAGE) trial patients. We defined high risk as the onset of Canadian Cardiovascular Society class III angina within 2 months or stabilized acute coronary syndrome within 2 weeks of enrollment. The primary end point was death or myocardial infarction after 4.6 years. Of the 2,287 patients enrolled in the COURAGE trial, 264 (12%) were high risk and had a relative risk of 1.56 for death or myocardial infarction (p = 0.0008) compared to those with non-high-risk features. A total of 35 primary events occurred in the OMT group and 32 in the percutaneous coronary intervention plus OMT group (hazard ratio 1.11, 95% confidence interval 0.69 to 1.79; p = 0.68). No significant difference was found in the prevalence of angina between the 2 groups at 1 year. During the first year of follow-up, 30% of the OMT patients crossed over to the revascularization group. In conclusion, an initial strategy of OMT alone for high-risk patients in the COURAGE trial did not result in increased death or myocardial infarction at 4.6 years or worse angina at 1 year, but it was associated with a high rate of crossover to revascularization.

Influence of renal function on the effects of early revascularization in non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction: data from the Swedish Web-System for Enhancement and Development of Evidence-Based Care in Heart Disease Evaluated According to Recommended Therapies (SWEDEHEART)

BACKGROUND

It is unknown whether patients with non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction derive a similar benefit from an early invasive therapy at different levels of renal function.

METHODS AND RESULTS

A total of 23 262 consecutive non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction patients <or=80 years old were included in a nationwide coronary care unit register between 2003 and 2006. Glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) was estimated with the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease Study formula. Patients were divided into medically or invasively treated groups if revascularized within 14 days of admission. A propensity score for the likelihood of invasive therapy was calculated. A Cox regression model with adjustment for propensity score and discharge medication was used to assess the association between early revascularization and 1-year mortality across renal function stages. There was a gradient, with significantly fewer patients treated invasively with declining renal function: eGFR >or=90 mL . min(-1) . 1.73 m(-2), 62%; eGFR 60 to 89 mL . min(-1) . 1.73 m(-2), 55%; eGFR 30 to 59 mL . min(-1) . 1.73 m(-2), 36%; eGFR 15 to 29 mL . min(-1) . 1.73 m(-2), 14%; and eGFR <15 mL . min(-1) . 1.73 m(-2)/dialysis, 15% (P<0.001). After adjustment, the overall 1-year mortality was 36% lower (hazard ratio 0.64, 95% confidence interval 0.56 to 0.73, P<0.001) with an invasive strategy. The magnitude of survival difference was similar in normal-to-moderate renal function groups. The lower mortality observed with invasive therapy declined with lower renal function, with no difference in mortality in patients with kidney failure (eGFR <15 mL . min(-1) . 1.73 m(-2)) or in those receiving dialysis (hazard ratio 1.61, 95% confidence interval 0.84 to 3.09, P=0.15).

CONCLUSIONS

Early invasive therapy is associated with greater 1-year survival in patients with non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction and mild-to-moderate renal insufficiency, but the benefit declines with lower renal function, and is less certain in those with renal failure or on dialysis.

Percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary artery bypass grafting as primary revascularization in patients with acute coronary syndrome

New European Society of Cardiology/American College of Cardiology guidelines classify patients with acute coronary syndrome and increased cardiac troponins as non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) who would have been classified as unstable angina pectoris (UAP) using the older World Health Organization (WHO) definition. The optimal revascularization strategy in these patients is poorly defined. This prospective cohort study included 1,024 consecutive patients with acute coronary syndrome classified as UAP, NSTEMI according to the WHO definition (WHO NSTEMI), and NSTEMI additionally identified by the novel European Society of Cardiology/American College of Cardiology definition (additional NSTEMI). All patients underwent coronary angiography within 24 hours and were treated with immediate percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or early coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). The primary end point was all-cause mortality during follow-up of 36 months. Patients with additional NSTEMI showed excessive cumulative 3-year mortality if undergoing CABG (hazard ratio 5.9, 95% confidence interval 2.7 to 13.1, p <0.001). In patients with UAP or WHO NSTEMI, mortality was similar in the CABG and PCI groups. In conclusion, in the absence of randomized trials specifically including patients with additional NSTEMI, the excessive mortality observed with CABG in this cohort study suggested that PCI may be the preferable revascularization strategy in this subgroup.

Variations in the associations between psychiatric comorbidity and hospital mortality according to the method of identifying psychiatric diagnoses

OBJECTIVE

Little is known about associations between psychiatric comorbidity and hospital mortality for acute medical conditions. This study examined if associations varied according to the method of identifying psychiatric comorbidity and agreement between the different methods.

PATIENTS/PARTICIPANTS

The sample included 31,218 consecutive admissions to 168 Veterans Affairs facilities in 2004 with a principle diagnosis of congestive heart failure (CHF) or pneumonia. Psychiatric comorbidity was identified by: (1) secondary diagnosis codes from index admission, (2) prior outpatient diagnosis codes, (3) and prior mental health clinic visits. Generalized estimating equations (GEE) adjusted in-hospital mortality for demographics, comorbidity, and severity of illness, as measured by laboratory data.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Rates of psychiatric comorbidities were 9.0% using inpatient diagnosis codes, 27.4% using outpatient diagnosis codes, and 31.0% using mental health visits for CHF and 14.5%, 33.1%, and 34.1%, respectively, for pneumonia. Agreement was highest for outpatient codes and mental health visits (kappa = 0.51 for pneumonia and 0.50 for CHF). In GEE analyses, the adjusted odds of death for patients with psychiatric comorbidity were lower when such comorbidity was identified by mental health visits for both pneumonia (odds ratio [OR] = 0.85; P = .009) and CHF (OR = 0.70; P < .001) and by inpatient diagnosis for pneumonia (OR = 0.63; P < or = .001) but not for CHF (OR = 0.75; P = .128). The odds of death were similar (P > .2) for psychiatric comorbidity as identified by outpatient codes for pneumonia (OR = 1.04) and CHF (OR = 0.93).

CONCLUSIONS

The method used to identify psychiatric comorbidities in acute medical populations has a strong influence on the rates of identification and the associations between psychiatric illnesses with hospital mortality.

Prognostic differences between routine invasive and conservative strategies for the management of high-risk, non-ST segment acute coronary syndromes: Experience from two consecutive periods in a single center

BACKGROUND

The optimal revascularization strategy for non-ST elevation acute coronary syndromes (NSTE-ACS) remains controversial, especially in a real world context. The objective of this work was to assess differences at 1 year in all-cause mortality and the composite endpoint of mortality or acute myocardial infarction (MI) between two management strategies for NSTE-ACS: a conservative strategy (CS) versus a routine invasive strategy (RIS).

METHODS

Of 799 consecutive patients admitted to our institution, 369 were treated with CS (from January 2001 to October 2002); 430 patients admitted with the same diagnosis were treated with RIS (from November 2002 to November 2004). A propensity score (PS) matched sample was created and included 694 patients (87% of the original population). The event rate was compared between each paired member of the PS-matched sample, one receiving RIS and the other CS, and their differences were tested by Cox proportional analysis.

RESULTS

No significant differences in baseline characteristics were noted between the two management cohorts. By design, the rate of in-hospital catheterization and revascularization procedures increased in RIS compared with CS. The mortality rate was lower, but not significant, in RIS (HR: 0.76, 95% CI=0.51-1.11; p=0.155). For the composite of death or MI, RIS showed a relative risk reduction of 29% (HR: 0.71, 95% CI=0.53-0.94); p=0.018) compared with CS, differences that become non-significant (p=0.680) if we adjust for differences in rate of revascularization procedures and changes in medication prescription.

CONCLUSIONS

RIS was associated with a 1-year lower risk of the combined endpoint of all-cause death and MI in patients with NSTE-ACS, attributable to changes in frequency of revascularization procedures and in medical treatment.

Coronary angiography in the elderly with acute myocardial infarction

BACKGROUND

Despite the high mortality rate in elderly patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI), the value of coronary angiography (CA) in the elderly has been questioned due to a less favorable outcome. The aim of the study was to determine the prognostic significance of CA on mortality of elderly patients AMI in "real world" practice.

METHODS

The study cohort comprised 1009 elderly (age > or = 75 years) patients with AMI who were derived from three prospective national surveys between 1996 and 2000 in all 25 CCUs operating in Israel. Baseline characteristics, hospital course, management and outcome of 274 (27%) elderly patients who underwent CA during the index hospitalization were compared with 735 (73%) counterpart patients who did not.

RESULTS

Patients who underwent CA were on average 2.2 years younger, and were more often with hyperlipidemia (p<0.0001 for each) and with a history of previous percutaneous coronary intervention (p<0.03) than the control group. They had a more favorable clinical presentation: a higher systolic blood pressure (p<0.04), a better Killip class (p<0.03) and an increased frequency of non-Q wave MI (p<0.03). They developed more often recurrent MI (p=0.002) and re-ischemia (p<0.0001). Variables associated with CA use during the index hospitalization were re-infarction, re-ischemia, the year of the index AMI and the availability of an on-site a catheterization laboratory in the hospital, while a higher age and fibrinolytic therapy decreased the likelihood of CA use. Of the patients who underwent CA, 67% underwent coronary revascularization (either PCI and/or CABG). Crude and adjusted mortality rates at 1 year were significantly lower in patients who underwent CA, as compared to counterparts who did not: 21% vs. 37.3%, respectively (p<0.0001), hazard ratio=0.52 (95% confidence interval 0.38-0.71). The benefit of CA was noted in a wide range of subgroups analyzed.

CONCLUSIONS

In "real world" practice, elderly patients with AMI who undergo CA during hospitalization have a better prognosis at 1 year. Age alone should not be a deterrent to performing CA in elderly patients with AMI. Further large randomized trials are needed to confirm that an invasive approach is beneficial in high-risk elderly patients with AMI.

CONDENSED ABSTRACT

To determine the prognostic significance of coronary angiography (CA) during the course of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) in "real world" practice on mortality of elderly patients, 1009 such patients were studied. Re-infarction, re-ischemia, the year of the index AMI and the availability of an on-site a Cath. Lab. were variables which increased the likelihood of undergoing CA, while a higher age and fibrinolytic therapy decreased this likelihood. The crude and covariate adjusted mortality rates at 1 year were significantly lower in patients who underwent CA in comparison to counterparts who did not: 21% vs. 37.3%, respectively (p<0.0001), hazard ratio 0.52 (95% confidence interval 0.38-0.71). The benefit of CA was noted across a wide range of subgroups analyzed.

Troponin-T and N-Terminal Pro-B-Type Natriuretic Peptide Predict Mortality Benefit From Coronary Revascularization in Acute Coronary Syndromes

OBJECTIVES

This study was designed to evaluate biomarkers for selection of patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes (ACS) that derive mortality benefit from revascularization.

BACKGROUND

Biomarkers are essential for identification of patients at increased risk, which may be reduced by revascularization.

METHODS

During the initial 30 days, 2,340 patients of 7,800 (30%) with non-ST-segment elevation ACS in the GUSTO (Global Utilization of Strategies To open Occluded arteries)-IV trial underwent coronary revascularization. The 1-year mortality was calculated in 30-day survivors stratified by status of revascularization and levels of biomarkers. A propensity score for receiving revascularization was constructed and included in a survival analysis that also included the time point of revascularization as a time-dependent covariate.

RESULTS

Elevation of troponin-T or N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) was associated with a high mortality. In patients with either or both of these markers elevated, a lower mortality following revascularization was observed. In contrast, patients without elevation of these markers had low 1-year mortality without any reduction in mortality following revascularization. In fact, in patients with normal levels of both troponin-T and NT-proBNP, a significant increase in 1-year mortality after revascularization was observed. Elevation of C-reactive protein, interleukin-6, creatinine clearance, and ST-segment depression was also related to a higher mortality. However, independent of these markers, mortality was lower after revascularization.

CONCLUSIONS

Markers of troponin-T and NT-proBNP not only assist in risk stratification of patients with non-ST-segment elevation ACS but also appear to identify patients who have a reduced mortality associated with early coronary revascularization.

Low risk is associated with poorer quality of life than high risk following acute coronary syndrome

BACKGROUND

Morbidity after acute coronary syndromes includes both physical and mental disorders affecting quality of life. The aim of this investigation was to study quality of life at a 3-month follow-up in patients with acute coronary syndrome, with the main objective of exploring whether unstable angina pectoris and myocardial infarction (MI) patients differ in this respect.

METHODS

This investigation was part of a prospective risk stratification study of consecutive patients with acute coronary syndrome of whom 814 below the age of 75 years (278 diagnosed with unstable angina pectoris and 536 with myocardial infarction) accepted an invitation to a follow-up visit 3 months after discharge. At follow-up, the patients completed the Cardiac Health Profile, a disease-specific quality of life questionnaire, designed to evaluate perceived cognitive, emotional, social and physical function.

RESULTS

Quality of life was mainly influenced by patient characteristics and previous history. The Cardiac Health Profile scores in unstable angina pectoris patients were significantly higher (i.e. poorer quality of life) than myocardial infarction patients at the 3-month visit (34, 22, 50; median, 25th, 75th percentile and 30, 19, 44; median, 25th, 75th percentile, respectively, P=0.006). The adjusted odds ratio for a poorer quality of life in unstable angina pectoris patients in relation to myocardial infarction patients was 1.39 (95% confidence interval 1.03, 1.87; P=0.03). The highest Cardiac Health Profile scores were seen in the unstable angina pectoris patients without electrocardiogram signs of ongoing ischemia and/or elevated markers of myocardial necrosis.

CONCLUSION

Patients with unstable angina pectoris, especially of the low-risk type, and therefore treated accordingly, are more likely to experience poorer quality of life following an acute hospitalization than patients with other types of acute coronary syndrome. Once myocardial infarction or high-risk unstable angina pectoris has been ruled out, these patients still require a careful and systematic follow-up.

Impact of Early Coronary Artery Bypass Graft in an Unselected Acute Coronary Syndrome Patient Population

BACKGROUND

Performance of coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) during an acute coronary syndrome (ACS) is mainly used in high-risk patients. Although potentially life-saving, patients undergoing early CABG are traditionally associated with a worse outcome than those not requiring CABG. Is this really true in an unselected ACS population? The aim of this study was to evaluate, in an ACS population, if the performance of CABG during the index hospitalization influences in-hospital outcome.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Retrospective analysis of a nationwide database of 12,988 ACS patients admitted since 2002. Of those, 267 patients underwent CABG during the index hospitalization (group A) and 12,721 did not (group B). Group B patients were further divided in 2 subgroups: those submitted to percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) (group B1; n=3948) during the index hospitalization and those not submitted to mechanical revascularization (group B2; n =8773). Patients from group A more frequently had diabetes, hypercholesterolemia, hypertension, and previous angina; they were also more often on cardiovascular medication before admission. Patients that underwent CABG were more often in Killip class IV at admission (4.8% versus 1.4% versus 2.0%); they also received more nitrates and catecholamines. Left ventricular function was better in group B1. Group A patients were more often on mechanical ventilation and intra-aortic pump and they had more in-hospital complications (31.1% versus 18.7% versus 17.3%), namely recurrent angina, re-infarction, and mechanical complications. They had a more severe coronary anatomy and the culprit lesion was more frequently on the left main (7.7% versus 0.5% versus 2.2%). However, their in-hospital mortality was significantly lower (1.1% versus 2.2% versus 6.8%; P<0.001). Multivariate analysis showed that performance of early CABG was an independent predictor of lower mortality (odds ratio of 0.12), as were the use of low-molecular-weight heparins, beta-blockers, and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors.

CONCLUSIONS

In unselected patients admitted for ACS, performance of early CABG, despite being performed in higher-risk patients, is associated with very low in-hospital mortality, even when compared with the mortality of lower-risk population not submitted to early CABG. Therefore, early performance of this procedure should be considered more often in eligible patients.

Coronary revascularization for non-ST elevation acute coronary syndrome: state of the art

Immediate as well as early revascularization may be beneficial in patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) without ST elevation, but has traditionally employed as an 'ischemia-guided' strategy. A number of randomized trials (including more than 10 000 patients) and observational studies have compared routine invasive versus selective invasive treatment in patients with an acute coronary syndrome without ST elevation. Most randomized trials are limited by a high cross-over rate, whereas observational studies are limited by selection bias. Data from registries have demonstrated benefits with an invasive approach. The results from randomized trials are less clear regarding mortality reduction, although long-term survival after hospital discharge may be better after the invasive approach. In the randomized trials, there was a decreased risk of death or myocardial infarction after the invasive approach (odds ratio = 0.88, 95% confidence interval = 0.76-1.0). Despite the optimal timing of angiography and subsequent revascularization, if appropriate, angiography and revascularization should be considered in every patient admitted with an ACS without ST elevation, particularly in patients with high-risk characteristics, such as ST segment depression > 0.1 mV, accelerated angina in the prior 2 months, nitrate use in the prior week before admission and elevated troponin.

Guidelines for percutaneous coronary interventions. The Task Force for Percutaneous Coronary Interventions of the European Society of Cardiology

In patients with stable CAD, PCI can be considered a valuable initial mode of revascularization in all patients with objective large ischaemia in the presence of almost every lesion subset, with only one exception: chronic total occlusions that cannot be crossed. In early studies, there was a small survival advantage with CABG surgery compared with PCI without stenting. The addition of stents and newer adjunctive medications improved the outcome for PCI. The decision to recommend PCI or CABG surgery will be guided by technical improvements in cardiology or surgery, local expertise, and patients' preference. However, until proved otherwise, PCI should be used only with reservation in diabetics with multi-vessel disease and in patients with unprotected left main stenosis. The use of drug-eluting stents might change this situation. Patients presenting with NSTE-ACS (UA or NSTEMI) have to be stratified first for their risk of acute thrombotic complications. A clear benefit from early angiography (<48 h) and, when needed, PCI or CABG surgery has been reported only in the high-risk groups. Deferral of intervention does not improve outcome. Routine stenting is recommended on the basis of the predictability of the result and its immediate safety. In patients with STEMI, primary PCI should be the treatment of choice in patients presenting in a hospital with PCI facility and an experienced team. Patients with contra-indications to thrombolysis should be immediately transferred for primary PCI, because this might be their only chance for quickly opening the coronary artery. In cardiogenic shock, emergency PCI for complete revascularization may be life-saving and should be considered at an early stage. Compared with thrombolysis, randomized trials that transferred the patients for primary PCI to a 'heart attack centre' observed a better clinical outcome, despite transport times leading to a significantly longer delay between randomization and start of the treatment. The superiority of primary PCI over thrombolysis seems to be especially clinically relevant for the time interval between 3 and 12 h after onset of chest pain or other symptoms on the basis of its superior preservation of myocardium. Furthermore, with increasing time to presentation, major-adverse-cardiac-event rates increase after thrombolysis, but appear to remain relatively stable after primary PCI. Within the first 3 h after onset of chest pain or other symptoms, both reperfusion strategies seem equally effective in reducing infarct size and mortality. Therefore, thrombolysis is still a viable alternative to primary PCI, if it can be delivered within 3 h after onset of chest pain or other symptoms. Primary PCI compared with thrombolysis significantly reduced stroke. Overall, we prefer primary PCI over thrombolysis in the first 3 h of chest pain to prevent stroke, and in patients presenting 3-12 h after the onset of chest pain, to salvage myocardium and also to prevent stroke. At the moment, there is no evidence to recommend facilitated PCI. Rescue PCI is recommended, if thrombolysis failed within 45-60 min after starting the administration. After successful thrombolysis, the use of routine coronary angiography within 24 h and PCI, if applicable, is recommended even in asymptomatic patients without demonstrable ischaemia to improve patients' outcome. If a PCI centre is not available within 24 h, patients who have received successful thrombolysis with evidence of spontaneous or inducible ischaemia before discharge should be referred to coronary angiography and revascularized accordingly--independent of 'maximal' medical therapy.