2014


To access this material please log in or register

Register Authorize
2014/№5

Results of early and delayed invasive approaches in managing patients with non-ST elevation acute coronary syndrome

Tsvetkov R. S., Mironkov A. B., Pryamikov A. D.

Keywords: non-ST elevation ACS, transcatheter coronary intervention


DOI: 10.18087/rhj.2014.5.1958

Background. Reports on advantages of early and delayed invasive approaches in the treatment of patients with unstable angina / non-ST elevation MI are inconsistent. Aim. To compare outcomes of early and delayed approaches in the treatment of patients with non-ST elevation ACS (nSTEACS) and different GRACE risk scores. Materials and methods. 60 patients were divided into two groups: early intervention (n=30) and delayed intervention (n=30). In the early intervention group, coronary angiography (CAG) with subsequent transcutaneous coronary intervention (TCCI) was performed urgently (0.5 to 3 hours of admission); in the delayed intervention group, TCCI was performed within 2 to 7 days. Results. Early outcomes did not significantly differ between the treatment groups. In the remote period (30 days to 12 months), incidence of fatal outcome differed significantly (p=0.001) in favor of the delayed intervention. Significant differences between other indices (acute MI and angina relapse) were absent. Conclusion. Delayed CAG with subsequent endovascular revascularization is a method, which is effective and no less safe than urgent intervention for managing patients with nSTEACS whose condition cannot be stabilized with drugs.
  1. de Winter RJ, Windhausen F, Cornel JH et al. Early invasive versus selectively invasive management for acute coronary syndromes. N Engl J Med. 2005;353 (11):1095–1104.
  2. Neumann FJ, Kastrati A, Pogatsa-Murray G et al. Evaluation of prolonged antithrombotic pretreatment («cooling-off» strategy) before intervention in patients with unstable coronary syndromes: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA. 2003 Sep 24;290 (12):1593–9.
  3. Mehta SR, Cannon CP, Fox KA et al. Routine vs selective invasive strategies in patients with acute coronary syndromes: a collaborative meta-analysis of randomized trials. JAMA. 2005 Jun 15;293 (23):2908–17.
  4. Bavry AA, Kumbhani DJ, Rassi AN et al. Benefit of early invasive therapy in acute coronary syndromes: a meta-analysis of contemporary randomized clinical trials. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2006 Oct 3;48 (7):1319–25.
  5. O'Donoghue M, Boden WE, Braunwald E et al. Early invasive vs conservative treatment strategies in women and men with unstable angina and non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: a meta-analysis. JAMA. 2008 Jul 2;300 (1):71–80.
  6. Cannon CP, Weintraub WS, Demopoulos LA et al. Comparison of early invasive and conservative strategies in patients with unstable coronary syndromes treated with the glycoprotein IIb / IIIa inhibitor tirofiban. N Engl J Med. 2001 Jun 21;344 (25):1879–87.
  7. Effects of tissue plasminogen activator and a comparison of early invasive and conservative strategies in unstable angina and non-Q-wave myocardial infarction. Results of the TIMI IIIB Trial. Thrombolysis in Myocardial Ischemia. Circulation. 1994 Apr;89 (4):1545–56.
  8. Riezebos RK, Ronner E, Ter Bals E et al. Immediate versus deferred coronary angioplasty in non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes. Heart. 2009 May;95 (10):807–12.
  9. Fox KA, Dabbous OH, Goldberg RJ et al. Prediction of risk of death and myocardial infarction in the six months after presentation with acute coronary syndrome: prospective multinational observational study (GRACE). BMJ. 2006;333 (7578):1091.
  10. Antman EM, Cohen M, Bernink PJ et al. The TIMI risk score for unstable angina / non-ST elevation MI: a method for prognostication and therapeutic decision making. JAMA. 2000;284 (7):835–842.
  11. Mehta SR, Granger CB, Boden WE et al. Early versus delayed invasive intervention in acute coronary syndromes. N Engl J Med. 2009 May 21;360 (21):2165–75.
  12. Hirsch A, Windhausen F, Tijssen JG et al. Long-term outcome after an early invasive versus selective invasive treatment strategy in patients with non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome and elevated cardiac troponin T (the ICTUS trial): a follow-up study. Lancet. 2007 Mar 10;369 (9564):827–35.
  13. Damman P, Hirsch A, Windhausen F et al. 5‑year clinical outcomes in the ICTUS (Invasive versus Conservative Treatment in Unstable coronary Syndromes) trial a randomized comparison of an early invasive versus selective invasive management in patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2010 Mar 2;55 (9):858–64.
  14. Invasive compared with non-invasive treatment in unstable coronary-artery disease: FRISC II prospective randomised multicentre study. FRagmin and Fast Revascularisation during InStability in Coronary artery disease Investigators. Lancet. 1999;354 (9180):708–715.
  15. Lagerqvist B, Husted S, Kontny F et al. 5‑year outcomes in the FRISC–II randomised trial of an invasive versus a non-invasive strategy in non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome: a follow-up study. Lancet. 2006 Sep 16;368 (9540):998–1004.
  16. Fox KA, Poole-Wilson PA, Henderson RA et al. Interventional versus conservative treatment for patients with unstable angina or non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction: the British Heart Foundation RITA 3 randomised trial. Randomized Intervention Trial of unstable Angina. Lancet. 2002 Sep 7;360 (9335):743–51.
  17. Fox KA, Poole-Wilson P, Clayton TC et al. 5‑year outcome of an interventional strategy in non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome: the British Heart Foundation RITA 3 randomised trial. Lancet. 2005 Sep 10–16;366 (9489):914–20.
  18. Badings EA, The SH, Dambrink JH et al. Early or late intervention in high-risk non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndromes: results of the ELISA-3 trial. EuroIntervention. 2013 May 20;9 (1):54–61.
  19. Hoffmann U, Bamberg F, Chae CU et al. Coronary computed tomography angiography for early triage of patients with acute chest pain: the ROMICAT (Rule Out Myocardial Infarction using Computer Assisted Tomography) trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2009 May 5;53 (18):1642–50.
  20. Rubinshtein R, Halon DA, Gaspar T et al. Usefulness of 64‑slice cardiac computed tomographic angiography for diagnosing acute coronary syndromes and predicting clinical outcome in emergency department patients with chest pain of uncertain origin. Circulation. 2007 Apr 3;115 (13):1762–8.
  21. Meijboom WB, Mollet NR, Van Mieghem CA et al. 64‑Slice CT coronary angiography in patients with non-ST elevation acute coro­nary syndrome. Heart. 2007 Nov;93 (11):1386–92.
  22. Hollander JE, Chang AM, Shofer FS et al. One-year outcomes following coronary computerized tomographic angiography for evaluation of emergency department patients with potential acute coronary syndrome. Acad Emerg Med. 2009 Aug;16 (8):693–8.
  23. Chang SA, Choi SI, Choi EK et al. Usefulness of 64‑slice multidetector computed tomography as an initial diagnostic approach in patients with acute chest pain. Am Heart J. 2008 Aug;156 (2):375–83. Usefulness of 64‑slice multidetector computed tomo­graphy as an initial diagnostic approach in patients with acute chest pain. Am Heart J 2008;156:375–383.
Tsvetkov R.S., Mironkov A.B., Pryamikov A.D. Results of early and delayed invasive approaches in managing patients with non-ST elevation acute coronary syndrome. Russian Heart Journal. 2014;79 (5):271–277

To access this material please log in or register

Register Authorize
Ru En