Search

Background: The optimal timing of invasive coronary angiography (ICA) and revascularization in patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome is not well defined. We tested the hypothesis that a strategy of very early ICA and possible revascularization within 12 hours of diagnosis is superior to an invasive strategy performed within 48 to 72 hours in terms of clinical outcomes.Methods: Patients admitted with clinical suspicion of non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome in the Capital Region of Copenhagen, Denmark, were screened for inclusion in the VERDICT trial (Very Early Versus Deferred Invasive Evaluation Using Computerized Tomography) ( ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02061891). Patients with ECG changes indicating new ischemia or elevated troponin, in whom ICA was clinically indicated and deemed logistically feasible within 12 hours, were randomized 1:1 to ICA within 12 hours or standard invasive care within 48 to 72 hours. The primary end point was a combination of all-cause death, nonfatal recurrent myocardial infarction, hospital admission for refractory myocardial ischemia, or hospital admission for heart failure.Results: A total of 2147 patients were randomized; 1075 patients allocated to very early invasive evaluation had ICA performed at a median of 4.7 hours after randomization, whereas 1072 patients assigned to standard invasive care had ICA performed 61.6 hours after randomization. Among patients with significant coronary artery disease identified by ICA, coronary revascularization was performed in 88.4% (very early ICA) and 83.1% (standard invasive care). Within a median follow-up time of 4.3 (interquartile range, 4.1-4.4) years, the primary end point occurred in 296 (27.5%) of participants in the very early ICA group and 316 (29.5%) in the standard care group (hazard ratio, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.78-1.08). Among patients with a GRACE risk score (Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events) >140, a very early invasive treatment strategy improved the primary outcome compared with the standard invasive treatment (hazard ratio, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.67-1.01; P value for interaction=0.023).Conclusions: A strategy of very early invasive coronary evaluation does not improve overall long-term clinical outcome compared with an invasive strategy conducted within 2 to 3 days in patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome. However, in patients with the highest risk, very early invasive therapy improves long-term outcomes.Clinical Trial Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT02061891. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background—Coronary computed tomographic angiography (CTA) and myocardial perfusion imaging (CTP) is a validated approach for detection and exclusion of flow-limiting coronary artery disease (CAD), but little data are available on gender-specific performance of these modalities. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of combined coronary CTA and CTP in detecting flow-limiting CAD in women compared with men.Methods and Results—Three hundred and eighty-one patients who underwent both CTA-CTP and single-photon emission computed tomography myocardial perfusion imaging preceding invasive coronary angiography as part of the CORE320 multicenter study (Coronary Artery Evaluation Using 320-row Multidetector Computed Tomography Angiography and Myocardial Perfusion) were included in this ancillary study. All 4 image modalities were analyzed in blinded, independent core laboratories. Prevalence of flow-limiting CAD defined by invasive coronary angiography equal to 50% or greater with an associated single-photon emission computed tomography myocardial perfusion imaging defect was 45% (114/252) and 23% (30/129) in males and females, respectively. Patient-based diagnostic accuracy defined by the area under the receiver operating curve for detecting flow-limiting CAD by CTA alone in females was 0.83 (0.75–0.89) and for CTA-CTP was 0.92 (0.86–0.97; P=0.003) compared with men where the area under the receiver operating curve for detecting flow-limiting CAD by CTA alone was 0.82 (0.77–0.87) and for CTA-CTP was 0.84 (0.80–0.89; P=0.29).Conclusions—The combination of CTA-CTP was performed similarly in men and women for identifying flow-limiting coronary stenosis; however, in women, CTP had incremental value over CTA alone, which was not the case in men. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Implantation of drug-eluting stents (DES) limits the rate of coronary restenosis in most patients with coronary artery disease, but data are scarce with regard to their use in patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction and in connection with distal protection of the microvascular perfusion during primary percutaneous coronary intervention., Methods and Results: We randomly assigned 626 patients referred within 12 hours from symptom onset of an ST-elevation myocardial infarction to have a DES or a bare metal stent implanted in the infarct-related lesion with or without distal protection during primary percutaneous coronary intervention. Quantitative coronary angiography was performed during the index treatment and 8 months later. The primary end point was loss of the lumen diameter in the infarct-related lesion induced by neointimal proliferation. Patients were comparable with regard to baseline demographic and angiographic characteristics. The mean late lumen loss was significantly lower in patients treated with a DES (0.06 mm; SD, 0.66 mm) than in patients who had a bare metal stent implanted (0.47 mm; SD, 0.69 mm; P<0.001). The rate of the composite end point of cardiac death, recurrent myocardial infarction, and target lesion revascularization was 8.6% in the DES group versus 14.4% in the bare metal stent group (P=0.03). Cardiac death occurred in 4.2% and 1.6% of the patients (P=0.09) and stent thrombosis occurred in 2.0% and 2.6% (P=0.72), respectively., Conclusions: Implantation of DES improves the angiographic outcome and need for repeat revascularization without increasing the short-term risk of stent thrombosis but has a tendency to increase cardiac death in patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction.

Background: In patients with ischemic heart disease, high thoracic epidural analgesia (TEA) has been proposed to improve abnormalities of coronary function by inhibiting cardiac sympathetic tone. We evaluated the effect of TEA on myocardial blood flow in patients with ischemic heart disease., Methods and Results: Twenty male patients with multivessel ischemic heart disease were studied. An epidural catheter was inserted between the second and third thoracic vertebral interspace (Th2 to Th3). Analgesia was induced by epidural injection of bupivacaine 0.5%, and a sensory block from the sixth cervical (C6 to C7) to Th10 (Th8 to Th11) vertebral interspace was achieved. Myocardial blood flow was measured with dynamic 13N-ammonia PET with and without TEA at rest, during pharmacological vasodilation with dipyridamole, and during sympathetic stimulation with the cold pressor test. Myocardial blood flow during dipyridamole increased similarly, regardless of TEA, in all regions except in myocardium subtended by collateral arteries in which blood flow increased more with than without TEA (P<0.05). Without TEA, myocardial blood flow during the cold pressor test remained unchanged compared with myocardial blood flow at rest. In contrast, with TEA, myocardial blood flow increased in all vascular territories. Coronary vascular resistance increased during the cold pressor test without TEA, whereas with TEA, coronary resistance decreased in myocardium subtended by nonstenotic and stenotic coronary vessels and remained unchanged in myocardium subtended by occluded vessels., Conclusions: In patients with multivessel ischemic heart disease, TEA partly normalizes the myocardial blood flow response to sympathetic stimulation.