Search

Objectives: We aimed to describe global practice patterns of unfractionated heparin (UFH) use for diagnostic transradial cardiac catheterization., Background: The use of the radial artery approach for cardiac catheterization is increasing globally. Limited contemporary data exist to support the use or optimal dosing of UFH to prevent radial artery occlusion (RAO) and other thromboembolic complications., Methods: We performed a web-based international survey of 450 interventional cardiologists from 34 countries. We collected information regarding the experience and use of UFH for diagnostic transradial cardiac catheterization., Results: The survey was conducted between June and July 2016 and was completed by 227 (50.4%) interventional cardiologists. Overall, 83.3% performed >75% of their coronary angiograms via a radial approach, with the plurality (41.9%) having 10-20 years of clinical experience. Of all respondents, 7.5% did not use UFH for routine diagnostic transradial heart catheterization. Of the 92.5% who did use UFH, it was preferentially administered intra-arterially by 60% and intravenously by 40%. The majority (62.6%) of interventionalists used a fixed UFH dose with 5,000 IU being the most common dose (used in 48%). For those using a weight-based UFH (50 IU/kg) dosing regimen for diagnostic procedures (36.1%), the administered UFH dose ranged from 2,000 up to 10,000 IU., Conclusions: Despite the lack of firm evidence, the majority of interventional cardiologists who participated in the survey use UFH to prevent RAO for diagnostic transradial coronary angiography. However, there exist large practice disparities with regards to dose and route of administration. Given this knowledge gap, a dedicated randomized trial is warranted., (© 2018 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

Background: Monitoring anticoagulation with activated clotting time (ACT) has been proposed to reduce ischemic or bleeding events. However, the value of using ACT to improve outcomes is uncertain. This study sought to determine the relationship between ACT and outcomes during percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with non-ST-segment-elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS) treated by unfractionated heparin with GPIs (glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors)., Methods and Results: From the randomized TAO trial (Treatment of Acute Coronary Syndromes With Otamixaban), we analyzed the value of ACT to predict ischemic and bleeding outcomes in the 3275 patients receiving unfractionated heparin plus eptifibatide. Ischemic and safety outcomes were analyzed according to ACT to determine the best threshold. Median peak ACT was 225 s. There was no correlation ( r =-0.02; P =0.24) between the unfractionated heparin dose received and the ACT value before percutaneous coronary intervention. There was no evidence of a nonlinear association between ACT and either ischemic or bleeding events ( P =0.66; P =0.07). No threshold was found to predict ischemic complications. Conversely, increased bleeding was observed with ACT >230 s with an optimal threshold of ACTs ≥250 s (4.53% versus 6.17%; odds ratio, 1.46; 95% confidence interval, 1.04-2.06; P =0.028). This optimal threshold varied according to access site: ≥250 s (6.86% versus 10.18%; odds ratio, 1.57; 95% confidence interval, 1.00-2.45; P =0.047) by femoral approach and ≥290 s (2.86% versus 5.43%; odds ratio, 2.24; 95% confidence interval, 1.05-4.44; P =0.027) by radial approach., Conclusions: In the TAO trial, peak procedural ACT ≥250 s was associated with increased bleeding risk in non-ST-segment-elevation acute coronary syndrome patients treated with unfractionated heparin plus GPIs. This threshold was increased to 290 s when performing radial approach., Clinical Trial Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01076764., (© 2018 American Heart Association, Inc.)

Background: Since the introduction of newer, more potent P2Y12 receptor inhibitors (P2Y12ris), practice patterns and associated clinical outcomes in patients with myocardial infarction (MI) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and also requiring oral anticoagulation (OAC) have not been fully characterized., Methods: The Canadian Observational Antiplatelet Study was a prospective, multicenter, longitudinal, observational study (26 hospitals, December 2011 to May 2013) describing P2Y12ri treatment patterns and outcomes in patients with ST-elevation and non-ST-elevation MI undergoing PCI. We describe the clinical characteristics, treatment patterns, bleeding, and ischemic outcomes over the 15-month follow-up within and between the subgroups of patients discharged on either dual-antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) (acetyl salicylic acid [ASA]+P2Y12ri) or triple therapy (ASA+P2Y12ri+OAC)., Results: Of the 2,034 patients at discharge, 86% (n = 1,757) were on DAPT, whereas 14% (n = 277) were on triple therapy (50% warfarin, 50% non-vitamin K OAC [NOAC]). The frequency of newer P2Y12ri use (prasugrel or ticagrelor) was similar in the DAPT and triple therapy groups (28% vs 26%, respectively). In the triple therapy group, NOAC use was higher in those receiving a new P2Y12ri compared to those receiving clopidogrel (75% vs 41%, respectively, P < .0001). The unadjusted and adjusted events of major cardiovascular event (MACE) and bleeding were higher in the triple therapy group. For patients on triple therapy, the bleeding or MACE events were not significantly different between those on clopidogrel versus those on ticagrelor or prasugrel., Conclusion: In this observational study of MI patients requiring PCI, 1 in 8 were discharged on triple antithrombotic therapy, of whom 26% were on newer P2Y12ris. Patients on triple therapy had higher risk at baseline, with higher unadjusted and adjusted MACE and bleeding events compared to those on DAPT alone. Among triple therapy-treated patients, there was no difference in the MACE and bleeding events regardless of the P2Y12ri used., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Importance: The optimal anticoagulant for patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes (NSTE-ACS) managed with an invasive strategy remains controversial., Objective: To compare the clinical efficacy and safety of otamixaban, a novel intravenous direct factor Xa inhibitor, with that of unfractionated heparin plus downstream eptifibatide in patients with NSTE-ACS undergoing a planned early invasive strategy., Design, Setting, and Participants: Randomized, double-blind, active-controlled superiority trial that enrolled 13,229 patients with NSTE-ACS and a planned early invasive strategy, at 568 active sites in 55 countries and conducted between April 2010 and February 2013. A planned interim analysis was conducted for otamixaban dose selection., Interventions: Eligible participants were randomized to otamixaban (bolus and infusion, at 1 of 2 doses) or unfractionated heparin plus, at the time of percutaneous coronary intervention, eptifibatide. The otamixaban dose selected at interim analysis was an intravenous bolus of 0.080 mg/kg followed by an infusion of 0.140 mg/kg per hour., Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary efficacy outcome was the composite of all-cause death or new myocardial infarction through day 7., Results: Rates of the primary efficacy outcome were 5.5% (279 of 5105 patients) randomized to receive otamixaban and 5.7% (310 of 5466 patients) randomized to receive unfractionated heparin plus eptifibatide (adjusted relative risk, 0.99 [95% CI, 0.85-1.16]; P = .93). There were no differences for the secondary end points, including procedural thrombotic complications. The primary safety outcome of Thrombosis in Myocardial Infarction major or minor bleeding through day 7 was increased by otamixaban (3.1% vs 1.5%; relative risk, 2.13 [95% CI, 1.63-2.78]; P < .001). Results were consistent across prespecified subgroups., Conclusions and Relevance: Otamixaban did not reduce the rate of ischemic events relative to unfractionated heparin plus eptifibatide but did increase bleeding. These findings do not support the use of otamixaban for patients with NSTE-ACS undergoing planned early percutaneous coronary intervention., Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01076764.

Aims: The OASIS-6 trial demonstrated the benefit of fondaparinux in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) not undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention. Elderly compared to younger patients are at higher risk of bleeding and could have a different balance of benefits and risks when treated with antithrombotic therapy., Methods and Results: We explored the efficacy and safety of fondaparinux compared to control according to age tertiles in 12,092 patients with STEMI in the OASIS-6 trial. Death or myocardial infarction rates were reduced by fondaparinux in tertile I (age<56 years, 4.5% vs 4.8%, hazard ratio [HR] 0.94, 95% CI 0.71-1.25), in tertile II (age 56-68 years, 7.9% vs 9.7%, HR 0.80, 0.65-0.98), and in tertile III (age≥69 years, 17.2% vs 19.8%, HR 0.87, 95% CI 0.75-1.01, P for heterogeneity=0.87). Severe hemorrhage rates were reduced in tertile I (0.5% vs 0.6%, HR 0.94, 95% CI 0.41-2.12), in tertile II (0.9% vs 1.5%, HR 0.63, 95% CI 0.35-1.11), and in tertile III (2.1% vs 2.4%, HR 0.86, 95% CI 0.56-1.33, P for heterogeneity=0.86). Death, myocardial infarction, or severe hemorrhage rates were reduced in tertile I (4.8% vs 5.0%, HR 0.95, 95% CI 0.72-1.25), in tertile II (8.1% vs 10.1%, HR 0.79, 95% CI 0.65-0.97), and in tertile III (17.6% vs 20.4%, HR 0.86, 95% CI 0.74-1.00, P for heterogeneity=0.77)., Conclusion: The balance of benefits and risks of fondaparinux is consistent across age tertiles, supporting its use across the age spectrum of patients with STEMI who do not undergo primary percutaneous coronary intervention., (Copyright © 2010 Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Context: The optimal unfractionated heparin regimen for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes treated with fondaparinux is uncertain., Objective: To compare the safety of 2 unfractionated heparin regimens during PCI in high-risk patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes initially treated with fondaparinux., Design, Setting, and Participants: Double-blind randomized parallel-group trial in 179 hospitals in 18 countries involving 2026 patients undergoing PCI within 72 hours, nested within a cohort of 3235 high-risk patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes initially treated with fondaparinux enrolled from February 2009 to March 2010., Interventions: Patients received intravenously either low-dose unfractionated heparin, 50 U/kg, regardless of use of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa (GpIIb-IIIa) inhibitors or standard-dose unfractionated heparin, 85 U/kg (60 U/kg with GpIIb-IIIa inhibitors), adjusted by blinded activated clotting time (ACT)., Main Outcome Measures: Composite of major bleeding, minor bleeding, or major vascular access-site complications up to 48 hours after PCI. Key secondary outcomes include composite of major bleeding at 48 hours with death, myocardial infarction, or target vessel revascularization within day 30., Results: The primary outcome occurred in 4.7% of those in the low-dose group vs 5.8% in the standard-dose group (odds ratio [OR], 0.80; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.54-1.19; P = .27). The rates of major bleeding were not different but the rates of minor bleeding were lower with 0.7% in the low-dose group vs 1.7% in the standard-dose group (OR, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.16-0.97; P = .04). For the key secondary outcome, the rates for low-dose group were 5.8% vs 3.9% in the standard-dose group (OR, 1.51; 95% CI, 1.00-2.28; P = .05) and for death, myocardial infarction, or target vessel revascularization it was 4.5% for the low-dose group vs 2.9% for the standard-dose group (OR, 1.58; 95% CI, 0.98-2.53; P = .06). Catheter thrombus rates were very low (0.5% in the low-dose group and 0.1% in the standard-dose group, P = .15)., Conclusion: Low-dose compared with standard-dose unfractionated heparin did not reduce major peri-PCI bleeding and vascular access-site complications., Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00790907.

Objectives: This study sought to evaluate the relative safety and efficacy of fondaparinux and enoxaparin in patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) treated with glycoprotein (GP) IIb/IIIa inhibitors or thienopyridines., Background: The OASIS 5 (Fifth Organization to Assess Strategies in Ischemic Syndromes) trial showed that fondaparinux reduced major bleeding by 50% compared with enoxaparin while preserving similar efficacy. Whether this benefit is consistent in the presence or absence of concurrent antiplatelet therapy with clopidogrel and GP IIb/IIIa inhibitors is unknown., Methods: Patients with ACS (n = 20,078) were randomized as a part of the OASIS 5 trial to receive either fondaparinux or enoxaparin. The use of GP IIb/IIIa inhibitors or thienopyridines was at the discretion of the treating physician. A Cox proportional hazard model was used to compare outcomes., Results: Of the 20,078 patients randomized, 3,630 patients received GP IIb/IIIa and 13,531 received thienopyridines. There was a 40% reduction in major bleeding with fondaparinux compared with enoxaparin in those treated with GP IIb/IIIa (5.2% vs. 8.3%, hazard ratio [HR]: 0.61, p < 0.001). A similar reduction was found in those treated with thienopyridines (3.4% vs. 5.4%, HR: 0.62, p < 0.001). Ischemic events were similar between the groups, resulting in a superior net clinical outcome (death, myocardial infarction, refractory ischemia, or major bleeding) favoring fondaparinux (GP IIb/IIIa subgroup 14.8% vs. 18.9%, HR: 0.77, p = 0.001 and thienopyridines subgroup 11.0% vs. 13.2%, HR: 0.82, p < 0.001)., Conclusions: In patients receiving GP IIb/IIIa inhibitors or thienopyridines, fondaparinux reduces major bleeding and improves net clinical outcome compared with enoxaparin.

Background: The study aimed to compare the short-term costs and long-term cost-effectiveness of 2 antithrombotics, fondaparinux and enoxaparin, for non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome in the United States., Methods: It was based on a large randomized trial of 20,078 patients Fifth Organization to Assess Strategies in Acute Ischemic Syndromes Investigators [OASIS-5] comparing the therapies in these patients. In OASIS-5, fondaparinux patients had about half the rate of major bleeding 9 days after randomization and at least as good clinical outcomes (death, myocardial infarction, major bleeding and stroke) after 6 months of follow-up. Health care resource use and clinical efficacy data from the trial were incorporated into a cost-effectiveness model as applied to a general US health care system both for the time horizon of the study (6 months) and over the longer term., Results: The 180-day cost analysis indicates that fondaparinux would generate a cost saving of $547 per patient (95% CI $207-$924). Sensitivity analysis suggested that savings could vary between $494 and $733. When 180-day cost and clinical results were extrapolated to long-term cost-effectiveness, fondaparinux was dominant (less costly and more effective in terms of quality-adjusted life-years) under most scenarios., Conclusions: Fondaparinux is a more cost-effective antithrombotic agent than enoxaparin in non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome. This is true across the range of event risks seen in OASIS-5.

Background: The OASIS-5 (Organization to Assess Strategies in Ischemic Syndromes-5) trial demonstrated that fondaparinux was noninferior to enoxaparin while reducing the risk of bleeding by 50%. The objectives of our study were to assess the effects of fondaparinux compared to enoxaparin in patients stratified by their Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events (GRACE) score and to examine the ability of the GRACE score to predict bleeding in patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS)., Methods: We analyzed efficacy and safety according to the GRACE admission risk score., Results: The impact of fondaparinux versus enoxaparin on the primary outcome of death, myocardial infarction, and refractory ischemia at 180 days was similar in the low-, intermediate-, and high-risk groups: 7.0% versus 7.7% (hazard ratio [HR] 0.90, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.75-1.08), 10.2% versus 11.3% (HR 0.89, 95% CI 0.77-1.03), and 20.1% versus 21.1% (HR 0.95, 95% CI 0.85-1.06). Major bleeding rates were higher with increasing GRACE risk scores: 2.2%, 3.2%, and 4.1% in the low, intermediate, and high-risk groups. Six-month mortality was 2.2%, 4.2%, and 12.3% in the 3 groups. The risk of major bleeding was substantially lower with fondaparinux in all groups: 1.6% versus 2.9% (HR 0.55, 95% CI 0.39-0.77), 2.2% versus 4.1% (HR 0.53, 95% CI 0.40-0.70), 2.8% versus 5.5% (HR 0.50, 95% CI 0.38-0.64)., Conclusion: The GRACE score predicted both bleeding and mortality in patients with ACS. The efficacy and safety of fondaparinux were consistent in all risk groups supporting its use in a broad range of ACS patients.

Aims: Bleeding in patients with coronary artery disease has been linked with adverse outcomes. We examined the incidence and outcomes after bleeding in 20 078 patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) enrolled in the OASIS-5 trial who were treated with fondaparinux or the low-molecular weight heparin, enoxaparin., Methods and Results: Nine hundred and ninety (4.9%) patients developed major bleeding and 423 (2.1%) developed minor bleeding. Fondaparinux compared with enoxaparin reduced fatal bleeding [0.07 vs. 0.22%, relative risk (RR) 0.30, 95% CI: 0.13-0.71], non-fatal major bleeding (2.2 vs. 4.2%, RR 0.52, 95% CI: 0.44-0.61), minor bleeding (1.1 vs. 3.2%, RR 0.34, 95% CI: 0.27-0.42), and need for transfusion (1.8 vs. 3.1%, RR 0.56, 95% CI: 0.47-0.61) during the first 9 days. One of every six deaths during the first 30 days occurred in patients who experienced bleeding. Cox proportional hazards model revealed that major bleeding was associated with about a four-fold increased hazard of death, myocardial infarction, or stroke during the first 30 days and about a three-fold increased hazard during 180 days of follow up., Conclusion: Bleeding in patients with ACS is a powerful determinant of fatal and non-fatal outcomes. Reducing the risk of bleeding using a safer anticoagulant strategy during the first 9 days is associated with substantial reductions in morbidity and mortality.

Anticoagulant therapy is widely used for the management of acute coronary syndromes. In order to optimize patient outcomes, anticoagulants should ideally combine high antithrombotic efficacy with a low risk of bleeding. Intravenous unfractionated heparin has been in clinical use for more than 50 years and reduces the risk of recurrent ischemic events in patients with acute coronary syndromes but at the cost of increased bleeding. Enoxaparin, compared with intravenous unfractionated heparin, further reduces the risk of ischemic events but also increases bleeding. Neither of these approaches has been shown to reduce mortality. The synthetic parenteral Factor Xa inhibitor, fondaparinux, is highly effective for the prevention and treatment of venous thromboembolic disease in medical and surgical patients. The Organization for the Assessment of Strategies for Ischemic Syndromes (OASIS) 5 and 6 trials evaluated the efficacy and safety of fondaparinux in more than 32,000 patients with non-ST elevation acute coronary syndromes or ST elevation myocardial infarction. This clinical trial report discusses the findings of these two pivotal trials.

Background: The Fifth and Sixth Organization to Assess Strategies in Ischemic Syndromes (OASIS 5 and 6) trials evaluated fondaparinux, a synthetic factor Xa inhibitor, in patients with non-ST- and ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes, respectively. Combined results for these 2 trials on major efficacy and safety outcomes and data on the effects of fondaparinux in relation to interventional management strategy have not been previously reported., Methods and Results: We performed an individual patient-level combined analysis of 26 512 patients from the OASIS 5 and 6 trials who were randomized in a double-blind fashion to fondaparinux 2.5 mg daily or a heparin-based strategy (dose-adjusted unfractionated heparin or enoxaparin). Results were stratified according to whether an early invasive, a delayed invasive, or an initial conservative management strategy was performed. Fondaparinux was superior to heparin in reducing the composite of death, myocardial infarction, or stroke (8.0% versus 7.2%; hazard ratio [HR], 0.91; P=0.03) and death alone (4.3% versus 3.8%; HR, 0.89; P=0.05). Fondaparinux reduced major bleeding by 41% (3.4% versus 2.1%; HR, 0.59; P<0.00001) and had a more favorable net clinical outcome than heparin (11.1% versus 9.3%; HR, 0.83; P<0.0001). In 19 085 patients treated with an invasive strategy, fondaparinux suppressed ischemic events to an extent similar to heparin and reduced major bleeding by more than one-half, resulting in a superior net clinical outcome (10.8% versus 9.4%; HR, 0.87; P=0.008). A similar benefit also was observed in those treated with a conservative strategy (HR, 0.74; 95% confidence interval, 0.64 to 0.85; P<0.001)., Conclusions: Compared with a heparin-based strategy, fondaparinux reduced mortality, ischemic events, and major bleeding across the full spectrum of acute coronary syndromes and was associated with a more favorable net clinical outcome in patients undergoing either an invasive or a conservative management strategy.

Aims: No antithrombotic therapy has been shown to reduce mortality when used with thrombolytics in acute myocardial infarction (AMI). In the OASIS-6 trial, fondaparinux significantly reduced mortality and reinfarction without increasing bleeding in 12 092 patients with acute ST elevation MI., Methods and Results: We report the results of a subgroup analysis in the 5436 patients (45%) receiving thrombolytics. According to local practice, 4415 patients did not have an indication for unfractionated heparin (stratum 1) and 1021 did (stratum 2). Fondaparinux reduced the primary study outcome of death or MI at 30 days [Hazard ratio (HR) 0.79, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.68-0.92] with consistent reductions in both mortality (HR and CI) and reinfarction (HR and CI). There was a non-significantly lower rate of stroke (HR 0.77, CI 0.48-1.25). The risk of severe bleeding was significantly reduced (HR 0.62, CI 0.40-0.94), and thus the balance of benefit and risk (death, MI and severe haemorrhage) was clearly reduced by fondaparinux (HR 0.77, 95% CI 0.67-0.90). Results were consistent in the two strata, by the different types of thrombolytics and across various time intervals from symptom onset to treatment., Conclusion: In STEMI patients treated with thrombolytic agents (predominantly streptokinase), fondaparinux significantly reduced the risk of death, re-MI and severe bleeds.

Aims: At least one quarter of ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients do not receive reperfusion therapy, and these patients are at high risk for new ischaemic events. We evaluated fondaparinux treatment vs. usual care, i.e. placebo or unfractionated (UF) heparin, in a pre-specified subgroup of 2867 (out of 12 092) patients not receiving reperfusion treatment in the OASIS-6 trial., Methods: In all, 1458 patients were randomized to fondaparinux 2.5 mg once daily subcutaneously up to 8 days and 1409 patients to usual care (control). Randomization was stratified by indication for UF heparin (stratum II, n = 1226) or not (stratum I, n = 1641) based on the investigator's judgment., Results: The proportion of patients who suffered death or myocardial re-infarction at 30 days (primary outcome) was 12.2% in the fondaparinux vs. 15.1% in the control group, hazard ratio (HR) 0.80; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.65-0.98. There was no increase in severe bleedings, HR 0.82; CI 0.44-1.55, or strokes, HR 0.62; CI 0.29-1.33. Consequently, the composite of death, myocardial re-infarction, or severe bleeding were significantly reduced at 30 days, HR 0.81; CI 0.67-0.99. Reductions in death or myocardial re-infarction at 30 days were consistent in stratum I with fondaparinux vs. placebo, HR 0.88; 95% CI 0.65-1.19, and in stratum II with fondaparinux vs. UF heparin infusion for 24-48 h (n = 806), HR 0.74; CI 95% 0.57-0.97, P = 0.41 for heterogeneity., Conclusion: In STEMI patients not receiving reperfusion treatment, fondaparinux reduces the composite of death or myocardial re-infarction without an increase in severe bleedings or strokes as compared to placebo or UF heparin.

Objectives: This study reports a prospectively planned analysis of patients with acute coronary syndrome who underwent early percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in the OASIS-5 (Fifth Organization to Assess Strategies in Ischemic Syndromes) trial., Background: In the OASIS-5 trial, fondaparinux was similar to enoxaparin for short-term efficacy, but reduced major bleeding by one-half and 30-day mortality by 17%., Methods: The OASIS-5 trial was a double-blind, randomized comparison of fondaparinux and enoxaparin in 20,078 patients with acute coronary syndrome. A total of 12,715 patients underwent heart catheterization during the initial hospitalization, and 6,238 patients underwent PCI. In the fondaparinux group, intravenous fondaparinux was given for PCI. In the enoxaparin group, no additional anticoagulant was given if PCI was <6 h from last subcutaneous dose, and additional intravenous unfractionated heparin (UFH) was given if PCI was >6 h., Results: Fondaparinux compared with enoxaparin reduced major bleeding by more than one-half (2.4% vs. 5.1%, hazard ratio [HR] 0.46, p < 0.00001) at day 9, with similar rates of ischemic events, resulting in superior net clinical benefit (death, myocardial infarction, stroke, major bleeding: 8.2% vs. 10.4%, HR 0.78, p = 0.004). Fondaparinux reduced major bleeding 48 h after PCI irrespective of whether PCI was performed <6 h of the last enoxaparin dose (1.6% vs. 3.8%, HR 0.42, p < 0.0001) or >6 h when UFH was given (1.3% vs. 3.4%, HR 0.39, p < 0.0001). Catheter thrombus was more common in patients receiving fondaparinux (0.9%) than enoxaparin alone (0.4%), but was largely prevented by using UFH at the time of PCI, without any increase in bleeding., Conclusions: Upstream therapy with fondaparinux compared with upstream enoxaparin substantially reduces major bleeding while maintaining efficacy, resulting in superior net clinical benefit. The use of standard UFH in place of fondaparinux at the time of PCI seems to prevent angiographic complications, including catheter thrombus, without compromising the benefits of upstream fondaparinux.

Background: A recent randomized, controlled trial, the Fifth Organization to Assess Strategies in Acute Ischemic Syndromes (OASIS 5) trial, reported that major bleeding was 2-fold less frequent with fondaparinux than with enoxaparin in acute coronary syndromes (ACS). Renal dysfunction increases the risk for major bleeding., Objective: To compare the efficacy and safety of fondaparinux and enoxaparin over the spectrum of renal dysfunction observed in the OASIS 5 trial., Design: Subgroup analysis of a randomized, controlled trial., Setting: Patients presenting to the hospital with non-ST-segment elevation ACS., Patients: 19,979 of the 20,078 patients in the OASIS 5 trial in whom creatinine was measured at baseline., Measurements: Death, myocardial infarction, refractory ischemia, and major bleeding were evaluated separately and as a composite end point at 9, 30, and 180 days. Glomerular filtration rate (GFR) was calculated by using the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease formula., Results: The absolute differences in favor of fondaparinux (efficacy and safety) were most marked in patients with a GFR less than 58 mL/min per 1.73 m2; the largest differences occurred in major bleeding events. At 9 days, death, myocardial infarction, or refractory ischemia occurred in 6.7% of patients receiving fondaparinux and 7.4% of those receiving enoxaparin (hazard ratio, 0.90 [95% CI, 0.73 to 1.11]); major bleeding occurred in 2.8% and 6.4%, respectively (hazard ratio, 0.42 [CI, 0.32 to 0.56]). Statistically significant differences in major bleeding persisted at 30 and 180 days. The rates of the composite end point were lower with fondaparinux than with enoxaparin in all quartiles of GFR, but the differences were statistically significant only among patients with a GFR less than 58 mL/min per 1.73 m2., Limitations: Subgroup analyses warrant caution; the study was powered to detect noninferiority at 9 days. Fondaparinux is not approved for use in patients with ACS in the United States., Conclusions: The benefits of fondaparinux over enoxaparin when administered for non-ST-segment elevation ACS are most marked among patients with renal dysfunction and are largely explained by lower rates of major bleeding with fondaparinux.

Background: The combined use of anticoagulants, antiplatelet agents, and invasive coronary procedures reduces ischemic coronary events but also increases bleeding in patients with acute coronary syndromes. We therefore assessed whether fondaparinux would preserve the anti-ischemic benefits of enoxaparin while reducing bleeding., Methods: We randomly assigned 20,078 patients with acute coronary syndromes to receive either fondaparinux (2.5 mg daily) or enoxaparin (1 mg per kilogram of body weight twice daily) for a mean of six days and evaluated death, myocardial infarction, or refractory ischemia at nine days (the primary outcome); major bleeding; and their combination. Patients were followed for up to six months., Results: The number of patients with primary-outcome events was similar in the two groups (579 with fondaparinux [5.8 percent] vs. 573 with enoxaparin [5.7 percent]; hazard ratio in the fondaparinux group, 1.01; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.90 to 1.13), satisfying the noninferiority criteria. The number of events meeting this combined outcome showed a nonsignificant trend toward a lower value in the fondaparinux group at 30 days (805 vs. 864, P=0.13) and at the end of the study (1222 vs. 1308, P=0.06). The rate of major bleeding at nine days was markedly lower with fondaparinux than with enoxaparin (217 events [2.2 percent] vs. 412 events [4.1 percent]; hazard ratio, 0.52; P<0.001). The composite of the primary outcome and major bleeding at nine days favored fondaparinux (737 events [7.3 percent] vs. 905 events [9.0 percent]; hazard ratio, 0.81; P<0.001). Fondaparinux was associated with a significantly reduced number of deaths at 30 days (295 vs. 352, P=0.02) and at 180 days (574 vs. 638, P=0.05)., Conclusions: Fondaparinux is similar to enoxaparin in reducing the risk of ischemic events at nine days, but it substantially reduces major bleeding and improves long term mortality and morbidity. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00139815.)., (Copyright 2006 Massachusetts Medical Society.)

Context: Despite many therapeutic advances, mortality in patients with acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) remains high. The role of additional antithrombotic agents is unclear, especially among patients not receiving reperfusion therapy., Objective: To evaluate the effect of fondaparinux, a factor Xa inhibitor, when initiated early and given for up to 8 days vs usual care (placebo in those in whom unfractionated heparin [UFH] is not indicated [stratum 1] or unfractionated heparin for up to 48 hours followed by placebo for up to 8 days [stratum 2]) in patients with STEMI., Design, Setting, and Participants: Randomized double-blind comparison of fondaparinux 2.5 mg once daily or control for up to 8 days in 12,092 patients with STEMI from 447 hospitals in 41 countries (September 2003-January 2006). From day 3 through day 9, all patients received either fondaparinux or placebo according to the original randomized assignment., Main Outcome Measures: Composite of death or reinfarction at 30 days (primary) with secondary assessments at 9 days and at final follow-up (3 or 6 months)., Results: Death or reinfarction at 30 days was significantly reduced from 677 (11.2%) of 6056 patients in the control group to 585 (9.7%) of 6036 patients in the fondaparinux group (hazard ratio [HR], 0.86; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.77-0.96; P = .008); absolute risk reduction, 1.5%; 95% CI, 0.4%-2.6%). These benefits were observed at 9 days (537 [8.9%] placebo vs 444 [7.4%] fondaparinux; HR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.73-0.94; P = .003, and at study end (857 [14.8%] placebo vs 756 [13.4%] fondaparinux; HR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.79-0.97; P = .008). Mortality was significantly reduced throughout the study. There was no heterogeneity of the effects of fondaparinux in the 2 strata by planned heparin use. However, there was no benefit in those undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention. In other patients in stratum 2, fondaparinux was superior to unfractionated heparin in preventing death or reinfarction at 30 days (HR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.66-1.02; P = .08) and at study end (HR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.64-0.93; P = .008). Significant benefits were observed in those receiving thrombolytic therapy (HR, 0.79; P = .003) and those not receiving any reperfusion therapy (HR, 0.80; P = .03). There was a tendency to fewer severe bleeds (79 for placebo vs 61 for fondaparinux; P = .13), with significantly fewer cardiac tamponade (48 vs 28; P = .02) with fondaparinux at 9 days., Conclusion: In patients with STEMI, particularly those not undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention, fondaparinux significantly reduces mortality and reinfarction without increasing bleeding and strokes., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT00064428.

Background: Direct comparison of low-molecular-weight heparin, dalteparin, with unfractionated heparin (UFH) during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is limited. This study examined the relative effects of dalteparin and UFH on coagulation and angiographic and clinical indices during PCI., Methods: This was a double-blind randomized study, stratified by planned glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitor use. Both UFH and dalteparin were administered as an intra-arterial bolus immediately before PCI., Results: All randomized patients received the assigned study drug and underwent PCI. Mean activated clotting time levels were 344 seconds for UFH and 234 seconds for dalteparin (P < .0001). Anti-factor Xa levels were higher for dalteparin at 30 minutes (UFH 1.3 IU/mL vs dalteparin 1.7 IU/mL, P = .005)) and at 4 hours (UFH 0.27 IU/mL vs dalteparin 0.69 IU/mL, P < .0001). Angiographic success was > 90% in both groups, and angiographic complications were similar (UFH 2.5% vs dalteparin 3.8%). The composite of death, myocardial infarction, target vessel revascularization, or bailout glycoprotein IIb/IIIa at hospital discharge was 13.7% in the UFH group and 13.1% in the dalteparin group (P = not significant). There were 2 major bleedings requiring transfusion, both occurring in the UFH group., Conclusions: This study suggests that a single intra-arterial bolus of low-molecular-weight heparin without monitoring is feasible and warrants further investigation as an alternative to UFH during PCI.

Background: Factor Xa plays a central role in the generation of thrombin, making it a novel target for treatment of arterial thrombosis. Fondaparinux, a synthetic pentasaccharide, is a factor Xa inhibitor, which has been shown to be superior to enoxaparin for the prevention of venous thrombosis. We designed a large, phase III, randomized trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of fondaparinux compared with enoxaparin in acute coronary syndromes., Study Design: The OASIS-5 trial is a randomized, double-blind trial of fondaparinux versus enoxaparin in 20,000 patients with unstable angina or non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. The primary objective is to determine whether fondaparinux is noninferior to enoxaparin in preventing the composite of death, new myocardial infarction, and refractory ischemia at 9 days (primary outcome) and at 30 days (secondary outcome) after randomization. There will be additional follow-up of all patients for 3 to 6 months after randomization. If noninferiority is established at 9 days, superiority will be tested. The primary safety outcome is to evaluate the rates of major bleeds in the 2 groups with the balance of benefit and risk assessed by comparing the impact on the composite of the primary and safety outcomes. Secondary outcomes are each component of the composite primary outcome separately at days 9, 30, and up to 6 months. The TIMACS, a major substudy using a partial 2x2 factorial design evaluating whether early angiography and intervention (within 24 hours) are superior to a more delayed approach (after 36 hours) in reducing major ischemic events at 6 months after randomization., Conclusions: The MICHELANGELO OASIS 5 program will provide a comprehensive and reliable evaluation of fondaparinux in a broad spectrum of patients with ACS.

Background: Factor Xa plays a central role in the generation of thrombin, making it a novel target for treatment of arterial thrombosis. Fondaparinux is a synthetic factor Xa inhibitor that has been shown to be superior to standard therapies for the prevention of venous thrombosis. We performed a randomized trial to determine the safety and feasibility of fondaparinux in the percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) setting., Methods and Results: A total of 350 patients undergoing elective or urgent PCI were randomized in a blinded manner to receive unfractionated heparin (UFH), 2.5 mg fondaparinux IV, or 5.0 mg fondaparinux IV. Randomization was stratified for planned or no planned use of glycoprotein (GP) IIb/IIIa antagonists. The primary safety outcome was total bleeding, which was a combination of major and minor bleeding events. The incidence of total bleeding was 7.7% in the UFH group and 6.4% in the combined fondaparinux groups (hazard ratio, 0.81; 95% confidence interval, 0.35 to 1.84; P=0.61). Bleeding was less common in the 2.5-mg fondaparinux group compared with the 5-mg fondaparinux group (3.4% versus 9.6%, P=0.06). The composite efficacy outcome of all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, urgent revascularization, or need for a bailout GPIIb/IIIa antagonist was 6.0% in the UFH group and 6.0% in the fondaparinux group, with no significant difference in efficacy among the fondaparinux doses compared with UFH. Coagulation marker analysis at 6 and 12 hours after PCI demonstrated that fondaparinux was superior to UFH in inducing a sustained reduction in markers of thrombin generation, as measured by prothrombin fragment F1.2 (P=0.02)., Conclusions: In this pilot study of patients undergoing contemporary PCI, factor Xa inhibition with the synthetic anticoagulant fondaparinux in doses of 2.5 and 5.0 mg was comparable to UFH for clinical safety and efficacy outcomes. These data form the basis for further evaluation of fondaparinux in arterial thrombosis.

Context: Although reperfusion therapy, aspirin, beta-blockers, and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors reduce mortality when used early in patients with acute myocardial infarction (MI), mortality and morbidity remain high. No antithrombotic or newer antiplatelet drug has been shown to reduce mortality in acute MI., Objective: To evaluate the effects of reviparin, a low-molecular-weight heparin, when initiated early and given for 7 days in addition to usual therapy on the primary composite outcome of death, myocardial reinfarction, or strokes at 7 and 30 days., Design, Setting, and Patients: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial (Clinical Trial of Reviparin and Metabolic Modulation in Acute Myocardial Infarction Treatment Evaluation [CREATE]) of 15,570 patients with ST-segment elevation or new left bundle-branch block, presenting within 12 hours of symptom onset at 341 hospitals in India and China from July 2001 through July 2004., Intervention: Reviparin or placebo subcutaneously twice daily for 7 days., Main Outcome Measure: Primary composite outcome of death, myocardial reinfarction, or stroke at 7 and 30 days., Results: The primary composite outcome was significantly reduced from 854 (11.0%) of 7790 patients in the placebo group to 745 (9.6%) of 7780 in the reviparin group (hazard ratio [HR], 0.87; 95% CI, 0.79-0.96; P = .005). These benefits persisted at 30 days (1056 [13.6%] vs 921 [11.8%] patients; HR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.79-0.95; P = .001) with significant reductions in 30-day mortality (877 [11.3%] vs 766 [9.8%]; HR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.79-0.96; P = .005) and reinfarction (199 [2.6%] vs 154 [2.0%]; HR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.62-0.95; P = .01), and no significant differences in strokes (64 [0.8%] vs 80 [1.0%]; P = .19). Reviparin treatment was significantly better when it was initiated very early after symptom onset at 7 days (<2 hours: HR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.52-0.96; P = .03; 30/1000 events prevented; 2 to <4 hours: HR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.67-0.98; P = .03; 21/1000 events prevented; 4 to <8 hours: HR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.73-0.99; P = .05; 16/1000 events prevented; and > or =8 hours: HR, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.86-1.30; P = .58; P = .04 for trend). There was an increase in life-threatening bleeding at 7 days with reviparin and placebo (17 [0.2%] vs 7 [0.1%], respectively; P = .07), but the absolute excess was small (1 more per 1000) vs reductions in the primary outcome (18 fewer per 1000) or mortality (15 fewer per 1000)., Conclusions: In patients with acute ST-segment elevation or new left bundle-branch block MI, reviparin reduces mortality and reinfarction, without a substantive increase in overall stroke rates. There is a small absolute excess of life-threatening bleeding but the benefits outweigh the risks.

Background: Antiplatelet therapy with clopidogrel and acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) reduces major cardiovascular events in patients with ST and non-ST-segment-elevation acute coronary syndromes (ACS). Recent mechanistic and clinical data suggest that higher loading and maintenance doses of clopidogrel may achieve a more rapid and greater degree of platelet inhibition that translates into improved clinical outcomes, but this is yet to be formally evaluated in an adequately powered randomized trial. Objectives: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of (1) a higher loading and initial maintenance dose of clopidogrel compared with the standard-dose regimen and (2) high-dose ASA compared with low-dose ASA in patients with ST or non-ST-segment-elevation ACS managed with an early invasive strategy. Design: Multicenter, international, randomized, 2 x 2 factorial design trial evaluating a clopidogrel high-dose regimen (600 mg loading dose on day 1 followed by 150 mg once daily on days 2 to 7, followed by 75 mg once daily on days 8-30) compared with the standard-dose regimen (300 mg loading dose on day 1, followed by 75 mg once daily on days 2-30) and high-dose ASA (300-325 mg daily) versus low-dose ASA (75-100 mg daily) in patients with ST or non-ST-segment-elevation ACS managed with an early invasive strategy. The clopidogrel dose comparison is double-blind and the ASA dose comparison is open-label. The primary outcome is the composite of death from cardiovascular causes, myocardial (re)infarction or stroke up to day 30. The primary safety outcome is major bleeding. The sample size is 18,000 to 20,000 patients. Conclusions: The CURRENT-OASIS 7 trial will help to define optimal dosing regimens for clopidogrel and ASA in patients with ST and non-ST-segment-elevation ACS treated with an early invasive strategy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Clopidogrel pretreatment before percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) has been shown to reduce the risk of death and ischemic complications after PCI. However, the need for clopidogrel pretreatment is debated in patients receiving a glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitor (GPI). Methods: We performed a collaborative meta-analysis of the results of 3 randomized trials of clopidogrel pretreatment: PCI-CURE, CREDO, and PCI-CLARITY. Patients were stratified based on GPI use at the time of PCI (a postrandomization subgroup analysis). Odds ratios (ORs) and 95% CIs for the effect of clopidogrel pretreatment versus placebo pretreatment on the incidence of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction (MI), or stroke for up to 30 days after PCI were calculated for each trial within each GPI stratum and were combined using a random effects model. Results: Six thousand three hundred twenty-five patients were included, 32.4% of whom received a GPI. There was a consistent benefit of clopidogrel pretreatment in reducing the incidence of cardiovascular death, MI, or stroke after PCI both in patients who did not receive a GPI (OR 0.72, 95% CI 0.53-0.98, P = .03) and in those who did (OR 0.69, 95% CI 0.47-1.00, P = .05). There was no evidence of heterogeneity in the benefit of clopidogrel pretreatment between GPI use strata (P = .85 for heterogeneity). Clopidogrel pretreatment was not associated with a significant excess of TIMI major or minor bleeding, either in those who did not receive a GPI (OR 1.20, 95% CI 0.76-1.92) or in those who did (OR 1.22, 95% CI 0.71-2.09) (P = .97 for heterogeneity). Conclusion: Clopidogrel pretreatment before PCI is beneficial and safe regardless of whether a GPI is used at the time of PCI. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Background: Patients with stable coronary artery disease and diabetes with previous percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), particularly those with previous stenting, are at high risk of ischaemic events. These patients are generally treated with aspirin. In this trial, we aimed to investigate if these patients would benefit from treatment with aspirin plus ticagrelor.Methods: The Effect of Ticagrelor on Health Outcomes in diabEtes Mellitus patients Intervention Study (THEMIS) was a phase 3 randomised, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial, done in 1315 sites in 42 countries. Patients were eligible if 50 years or older, with type 2 diabetes, receiving anti-hyperglycaemic drugs for at least 6 months, with stable coronary artery disease, and one of three other mutually non-exclusive criteria: a history of previous PCI or of coronary artery bypass grafting, or documentation of angiographic stenosis of 50% or more in at least one coronary artery. Eligible patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to either ticagrelor or placebo, by use of an interactive voice-response or web-response system. The THEMIS-PCI trial comprised a prespecified subgroup of patients with previous PCI. The primary efficacy outcome was a composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke (measured in the intention-to-treat population).Findings: Between Feb 17, 2014, and May 24, 2016, 11 154 patients (58% of the overall THEMIS trial) with a history of previous PCI were enrolled in the THEMIS-PCI trial. Median follow-up was 3·3 years (IQR 2·8-3·8). In the previous PCI group, fewer patients receiving ticagrelor had a primary efficacy outcome event than in the placebo group (404 [7·3%] of 5558 vs 480 [8·6%] of 5596; HR 0·85 [95% CI 0·74-0·97], p=0·013). The same effect was not observed in patients without PCI (p=0·76, pinteraction=0·16). The proportion of patients with cardiovascular death was similar in both treatment groups (174 [3·1%] with ticagrelor vs 183 (3·3%) with placebo; HR 0·96 [95% CI 0·78-1·18], p=0·68), as well as all-cause death (282 [5·1%] vs 323 [5·8%]; 0·88 [0·75-1·03], p=0·11). TIMI major bleeding occurred in 111 (2·0%) of 5536 patients receiving ticagrelor and 62 (1·1%) of 5564 patients receiving placebo (HR 2·03 [95% CI 1·48-2·76], p<0·0001), and fatal bleeding in 6 (0·1%) of 5536 patients with ticagrelor and 6 (0·1%) of 5564 with placebo (1·13 [0·36-3·50], p=0·83). Intracranial haemorrhage occurred in 33 (0·6%) and 31 (0·6%) patients (1·21 [0·74-1·97], p=0·45). Ticagrelor improved net clinical benefit: 519/5558 (9·3%) versus 617/5596 (11·0%), HR=0·85, 95% CI 0·75-0·95, p=0·005, in contrast to patients without PCI where it did not, pinteraction=0·012. Benefit was present irrespective of time from most recent PCI.Interpretation: In patients with diabetes, stable coronary artery disease, and previous PCI, ticagrelor added to aspirin reduced cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, and stroke, although with increased major bleeding. In that large, easily identified population, ticagrelor provided a favourable net clinical benefit (more than in patients without history of PCI). This effect shows that long-term therapy with ticagrelor in addition to aspirin should be considered in patients with diabetes and a history of PCI who have tolerated antiplatelet therapy, have high ischaemic risk, and low bleeding risk.Funding: AstraZeneca. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Body mass index (BMI) affects drug levels of nonvitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants. We sought to assess whether BMI affected outcomes in the RE-DUAL PCI trial.Methods: RE-DUAL PCI (NCT02164864) evaluated the safety and efficacy of a dual-antithrombotic-therapy regimen using dabigatran (110 mg or 150 mg twice daily and a P2Y12 platelet antagonist) in comparison with triple therapy of warfarin, aspirin, and a P2Y12 platelet inhibitor in 2725 patients with atrial fibrillation who had undergone percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). We compared the risk of first International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis (ISTH)-defined major or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding events (primary endpoint) and the composite of death, myocardial infarction, stroke, systemic embolism, or unplanned revascularization (main efficacy endpoint) in relation to baseline BMI.Results: Median (range) BMI was 28.1 (14-66) kg/m2. Dabigatran dual therapy versus warfarin triple therapy had relevantly and similarly lower rates of bleeding at both 110 mg and 150 mg twice-daily doses, irrespective of BMI. Thromboembolic event rates appeared consistent across categories of BMI, including those <25 and ≥35 kg/m2 (P for interaction: 0.806 and 0.279, respectively).Conclusions: The reduction in bleeding with dabigatran dual therapy compared with warfarin triple therapy in patients here evaluated appears consistent across BMI categories. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In patients with non-ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) and GRACE (Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events) score >140, coronary angiography (CAG) is recommended by European and American guidelines within 24 hours. We sought to study the association of very early (ie, ≤12 hours), early (12-24 hours), and delayed (>24 hours) CAG in patients with NSTEMI with GRACE score >140 with ischemic outcomes.Methods: The TAO trial (Treatment of Acute Coronary Syndrome With Otamixaban) randomized patients with NSTEMI and CAG scheduled within 72 hours to heparin plus eptifibatide versus otamixaban. In this post hoc analysis, patients with a GRACE score >140 were categorized into 3 groups according to timing of CAG from admission (<12, ≥12-<24, and ≥24 hours). The primary ischemic outcome was the composite of all-cause death and myocardial infarction within 180 days of randomization.Results: CAG was performed in 4071 patients (<12 hours, n=1648 [40.5%]; 12-24 hours, n=1420 [34.9%]; ≥24 hours, n=1003 [24.6%]). With CAG ≥24 hours as a reference, CAG from 12 to 24 hours was not associated with a lower risk of primary ischemic outcome at 180 days (odds ratio, 0.96; 95% confidence interval, 0.75-1.23), whereas CAG <12 hours was associated with a lower risk of death and myocardial infarction (odds ratio, 0.71; 95% confidence interval, 0.55-0.91). Performing CAG <12 hours was also associated with a lower risk of death and myocardial infarction (odds ratio, 0.76; 95% confidence interval, 0.61-0.94; P=0.01) compared with CAG performed at 12 to 24 hours. No difference was observed in bleeding complications.Conclusions: In patients with high-risk NSTEMI, undergoing CAG within the initial 12 hours after admission (as opposed to later, either 12-24 or ≥24 hours) was associated with lower risk of ischemic outcomes at 180 days. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]