Circulation Cardiovascular Interventions · 2019 · 31 citations · 39 references
MedicineCardiologySurgeryCardiothoracic SurgeryClinical CardiologyInterventional CardiologyAcute Coronary Syndrome InterventionAcute Coronary SyndromesCoronary Artery DiseaseCoronary Artery SurgeryIschemic Heart DiseasePercutaneous Coronary InterventionAcute Coronary Syndrome ManagementClinical Outcomes After Percutaneous Coronary InterventionHealth Outcomes AnalysisHigh-risk Non-st Elevation Myocardial InfarctionPercutaneous Coronary Intervention CarePrimary Outcome AnalysisRefractory Angina TherapySafety Outcome Assessment
BACKGROUND: The benefits of routine invasive management in patients with prior coronary artery bypass grafts presenting with non-ST elevation acute coronary syndromes are uncertain because these patients were excluded from pivotal trials. METHODS: In a multicenter trial, non-ST elevation acute coronary syndromes patients with prior coronary artery bypass graft were prospectively screened in 4 acute hospitals. Medically stabilized patients were randomized to invasive management (invasive group) or noninvasive management (medical group). The primary outcome was adherence with the randomized strategy by 30 days. A blinded, independent Clinical Event Committee adjudicated predefined composite outcomes for efficacy (all-cause mortality, rehospitalization for refractory ischemia/angina, myocardial infarction, hospitalization because of heart failure) and safety (major bleeding, stroke, procedure-related myocardial infarction, and worsening renal function). RESULTS: Two hundred seventeen patients were screened and 60 (mean±SD age, 71±9 years, 72% male) were randomized (invasive group, n=31; medical group, n=29). One-third (n=10) of the participants in the invasive group initially received percutaneous coronary intervention. In the medical group, 1 participant crossed over to invasive management on day 30 but percutaneous coronary intervention was not performed. During 2-years' follow-up (median [interquartile range], 744 [570-853] days), the composite outcome for efficacy occurred in 13 (42%) subjects in the invasive group and 13 (45%) subjects in the medical group. The composite safety outcome occurred in 8 (26%) subjects in the invasive group and 9 (31%) subjects in the medical group. An efficacy or safety outcome occurred in 17 (55%) subjects in the invasive group and 16 (55%) subjects in the medical group. Health status (EuroQol 5 Dimensions) and angina class in each group were similar at 12 months. CONCLUSIONS: More than half of the population experienced a serious adverse event. An initial noninvasive management strategy is feasible. A substantive health outcomes trial of invasive versus noninvasive management in non-ST elevation acute coronary syndromes patients with prior coronary artery bypass grafts appears warranted. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01895751.
39
Standardized Bleeding Definitions for Cardiovascular Clinical Trials
Roxana Mehran, Sunil V. Rao, Deepak L. Bhatt et al. · Circulation · 2011 · 4.4K citations
Medicine, Cardiology, Hematology +10
2014 ESC/EACTS Guidelines on myocardial revascularization
European Heart Journal · 2014 · 4.3K citations · Full text
Medicine, Cardiology, Surgery +14
European Heart Journal · 2011 · 3.1K citations · Full text
Third Universal Definition of Myocardial Infarction
Kristian Thygesen, Joseph S. Alpert, Allan S. Jaffe et al. · Circulation · 2012 · 3K citations · Full text
Christopher P. Cannon, William S. Weintraub, Laura A. Demopoulos et al. · New England Journal of Medicine · 2001 · 2.1K citations · Full text