Search

Background: It is unclear whether stable, high-risk patients with persistent total occlusion of the infarct-related coronary artery identified after the currently accepted period for myocardial salvage has passed should undergo percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in addition to receiving optimal medical therapy to reduce the risk of subsequent events.Methods: We conducted a randomized study involving 2166 stable patients who had total occlusion of the infarct-related artery 3 to 28 days after myocardial infarction and who met a high-risk criterion (an ejection fraction of <50% or proximal occlusion). Of these patients, 1082 were assigned to routine PCI and stenting with optimal medical therapy, and 1084 were assigned to optimal medical therapy alone. The primary end point was a composite of death, myocardial reinfarction, or New York Heart Association (NYHA) class IV heart failure.Results: The 4-year cumulative primary event rate was 17.2% in the PCI group and 15.6% in the medical therapy group (hazard ratio for death, reinfarction, or heart failure in the PCI group as compared with the medical therapy group, 1.16; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.92 to 1.45; P=0.20). Rates of myocardial reinfarction (fatal and nonfatal) were 7.0% and 5.3% in the two groups, respectively (hazard ratio, 1.36; 95% CI, 0.92 to 2.00; P=0.13). Rates of nonfatal reinfarction were 6.9% and 5.0%, respectively (hazard ratio, 1.44; 95% CI, 0.96 to 2.16; P=0.08); only six reinfarctions (0.6%) were related to assigned PCI procedures. Rates of NYHA class IV heart failure (4.4% vs. 4.5%) and death (9.1% vs. 9.4%) were similar. There was no interaction between treatment effect and any subgroup variable (age, sex, race or ethnic group, infarct-related artery, ejection fraction, diabetes, Killip class, and the time from myocardial infarction to randomization).Conclusions: PCI did not reduce the occurrence of death, reinfarction, or heart failure, and there was a trend toward excess reinfarction during 4 years of follow-up in stable patients with occlusion of the infarct-related artery 3 to 28 days after myocardial infarction. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00004562 [ClinicalTrials.gov].). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Context: The American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) guidelines for the management of non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes (NSTE ACS) recommend early invasive management for high-risk patients, given the benefits with this approach demonstrated in randomized clinical trials.Objectives: To determine the use and predictors of early invasive management strategies (cardiac catheterization <48 hours following presentation) in high-risk patients with NSTE ACS and to examine the association of early invasive management with mortality.Design, Setting, and Patients: The CRUSADE (Can Rapid Risk Stratification of Unstable Angina Patients Suppress Adverse Outcomes With Early Implementation of the ACC/AHA Guidelines) Quality Improvement Initiative evaluated care patterns and outcomes for 17,926 high-risk NSTE ACS patients (positive cardiac markers and/or ischemic electrocardiographic changes) based on ACC/AHA guidelines recommendations at 248 US hospitals with catheterization and revascularization facilities between March 2000 and September 2002.Main Outcome Measures: Use of early invasive management within 48 hours of presentation, predictors of early invasive management, and in-hospital mortality. Results Of the 17,926 patients analyzed, 8037 (44.8%) underwent early cardiac catheterization less than 48 hours following presentation. Predictors of early invasive management included cardiology care, younger age, lack of prior or current congestive heart failure, lack of renal insufficiency, ischemic electrocardiographic changes, positive cardiac markers, white race, and male sex. Patients treated with early invasive management were more likely to be treated with medications and interventions recommended by the ACC/AHA guidelines and had a lower risk of in-hospital mortality after adjusting for differences in clinical characteristics and after comparing propensity-matched pairs (2.5% vs 3.7%, P<.001). Conclusions An early invasive management strategy is not utilized in the majority of high-risk patients with NSTE ACS. This strategy appears to be reserved for patients without significant comorbidities and those cared for by cardiologists and is associated with a lower risk of in-hospital mortality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This chapter about antithrombotic therapy for acute myocardial infarction (MI) is part of the Seventh ACCP Conference on Antithrombotic and Thrombolytic Therapy: Evidence Based Guidelines. Grade 1 recommendations are strong and indicate that the benefits do, or do not, outweigh risks, burden, and costs. Grade 2 suggests that individual patients' values may lead to different choices (for a full understanding of the grading see Guyatt et al, CHEST 2004; 126:179S-187S). Among the key recommendations in this chapter are the following: For patients with ischemic symptoms characteristic of acute MI of < 12 h in duration, and ST-segment elevation or left bundle-branch block (of unknown duration) on the ECG, we recommend administration of any approved fibrinolytic agent (Grade 1A). We recommend the use of streptokinase, anistreplase, alteplase, reteplase, or tenecteplase over placebo (all Grade 1A). For patients with symptom duration < 6 h, we recommend the administration of alteplase over streptokinase (Grade 1A). For patients with known allergy or sensitivity to streptokinase, we recommend alteplase, reteplase, or tenecteplase (Grade 1A). For patients with acute posterior MI of < 12 h duration, we suggest fibrinolytic therapy (Grade 2C). In patients with any history of intracranial hemorrhage, closed head trauma, or ischemic stroke within past 3 months, we recommend against administration of fibrinolytic therapy (Grade 1C+). For patients with acute ST-segment elevation MI whether or not they receive fibrinolytic therapy, we recommend aspirin, 160 to 325 mg p.o., at initial evaluation by health-care personnel followed by indefinite therapy, 75 to 162 mg/d p.o. (both Grade 1A). In patients allergic to aspirin, we suggest use of clopidogrel as an alternative therapy to aspirin (Grade 2C). For patients receiving streptokinase, we suggest administration of either i.v. unfractionated heparin (UFH) [Grade 2C] or subcutaneous UFH (Grade 2A). For all patients at high risk of systemic or venous thromboembolism (anterior MI, pump failure, previous embolus, atrial fibrillation, or left ventricular thrombus), we recommend administration of IV UFH while receiving streptokinase (Grade 1C+). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Although opening an occluded infarct-related artery >24 hours after myocardial infarction in stable patients in the Occluded Artery Trial (OAT) did not reduce events over 7 years, there was a suggestion that the effect of treatment might differ by patient age. Baseline characteristics and outcomes by treatment with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) versus optimal medical therapy alone were compared by prespecified stratification at age 65 years. A p value <0.01 was prespecified as significant for OAT secondary analyses. The primary outcome was death, myocardial infarction, or New York Heart Association class IV heart failure. Patients aged >65 years (n = 641) were more likely to be female, to be nonsmokers, and to have hypertension, lower estimated glomerular filtration rates, and multivessel disease compared to younger patients (aged ≤65 years, n = 1,560) (p <0.001). There was no significant observed interaction between treatment assignment and age for the primary outcome after adjustment (p = 0.10), and there was no difference between PCI and optimal medical therapy observed in either age group. At 7-year follow-up, younger patients tended to have angina more often compared to the older group (hazard ratio 1.21, 99% confidence interval 1.00 to 1.46, p = 0.01). The 7-year composite primary outcome was more common in older patients (p <0.001), and age remained significant after covariate adjustment (hazard ratio 1.42, 99% confidence interval 1.09 to 1.84). The rate of early PCI complications was low in the 2 age groups. The trend toward a differential effect of PCI in the young versus the old for the primary outcome was likely driven by measured and unmeasured confounders and by chance. PCI reduces angina to a similar degree in the young and old. In conclusion, there is no indication for routine PCI to open a persistently occluded infarct-related artery in stable patients after myocardial infarction, regardless of age. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Myocardial infarction often develops when thrombosis occurs at lesions that have not previously been flow limiting. However, the development of cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction in such circumstances has received little attention. The characteristics of 15 patients with cardiogenic shock who had no flow-limiting angiographic stenoses were compared with those of 767 patients with > or =1 stenosis who were enrolled in the Should We Emergently Revascularize Occluded Coronary Arteries for Cardiogenic Shock (SHOCK) trial and registry. Compared with patients with > or =1 flow-limiting stenosis, patients with no flow-limiting stenoses were less likely to have pulmonary edema on chest x-ray (29% vs 62%, p = 0.008) and to be white (53% vs 82%, p = 0.011), and they had lower median highest creatine kinase levels (702 vs 2,731 U/L, p = 0.018). For SHOCK trial patients, 1-year survival was 49% for patients with > or =1 flow-limiting stenosis and 71% for those with no flow-limiting stenoses (p = 0.268). In conclusion, patients with cardiogenic shock without flow-limiting stenosis have different characteristics, and potentially disease mechanisms, and they do not require revascularization. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: We examined the clinical, angiographic, and procedural characteristics determining survival after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for cardiogenic shock.Background: The SHOCK (SHould we emergently revascularize Occluded coronaries for Cardiogenic shocK?) trial prospectively enrolled patients with shock complicating acute myocardial infarction (MI). Patients were randomized to a strategy of early revascularization or initial medical stabilization.Methods: Patients randomized to early revascularization underwent PCI or bypass surgery on the basis of predefined clinical criteria. Patients randomized to early revascularization who underwent PCI and had angiographic films available for analysis are the subject of this report (n = 82).Results: The median time from MI to PCI was 11 h. The majority of patients had occluded culprit arteries (Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction [TIMI] grade 0 or 1 flow in 62%) and multivessel disease (81%). One-year mortality in PCI patients was 50%. Mortality was 39% if PCI was successful but 85% if unsuccessful (p < 0.001). Mortality was 38% if TIMI flow grade 3 was achieved, 55% with TIMI grade 2 flow, and 100% with TIMI grade 0 or 1 flow (p < 0.001). Mortality was 67% if severe mitral regurgitation was documented. Independent correlates of mortality were as follows: increasing age (p < 0.001), lower systolic blood pressure (p = 0.009), increasing time from randomization to PCI (p = 0.019), lower post-PCI TIMI flow (0/1 vs. 2/3) (p < 0.001), and multivessel PCI (p = 0.040).Conclusions: Restoration of coronary blood flow is a major predictor of survival in cardiogenic shock. Benefit appears to extend beyond the generally accepted 12-h post-infarction window. Surgery should be considered in shock patients with severe mitral insufficiency or multivessel disease not amenable to relatively complete percutaneous revascularization. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: The goal of this study was to describe the core laboratory angiographic findings of "SHould we emergently revascularize Occluded Coronaries for cardiogenic shocK" (SHOCK) trial participants and to determine the relationship of angiographic parameters to one-year survival.Background: In the SHOCK trial, emergency revascularization improved one-year survival of patients with cardiogenic shock compared with initial medical stabilization including thrombolysis and intraaortic balloon counterpulsation.Methods: Coronary angiography was performed by protocol in 147 of 152 (97%) patients in the emergency revascularization (ERV) group and by clinical selection in 100 of 150 (67%) patients in the initial medical stabilization (IMS) group. Of the other 50 IMS patients, 45 of 50 (90%) died rapidly and did not undergo angiography.Results: Left ventricular ejection fraction was correlated with one-year survival in both treatment groups (p < 0.001). In the IMS group, the hazard ratio for death was 2.59 (95% confidence interval 1.47 to 4.58, p = 0.001) per diseased vessel (0/1 vs. 2 vs. 3). In the ERV group, the hazard ratio for death per diseased vessel was 1.11 (95% confidence interval 0.79 to 1.56, p = 0.559). Multivariate analysis of the angiography cohort (without regard for left ventriculogram measurements) identified initial Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction flow grade (p = 0.032), number of diseased vessels (for IMS patients only, p = 0.024), and culprit vessel (p = 0.004) as independent correlates of one-year survival, even after adjustment for key clinical factors. In the smaller cohort with left ventricular ejection fraction measured (n = 97), ejection fraction and culprit vessel remained independently correlated with survival.Conclusions: For patients in cardiogenic shock, left ventricular function and culprit vessel were independent correlates of one-year survival. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Platelets are key mediators of atherothrombosis, yet, limited tools exist to identify individuals with a hyperreactive platelet phenotype. In this study, we investigate the association of platelet hyperreactivity and cardiovascular events, and introduce a tool, the Platelet Reactivity ExpreSsion Score (PRESS), which integrates platelet aggregation responses and RNA sequencing. Among patients with peripheral artery disease (PAD), those with a hyperreactive platelet response (>60% aggregation) to 0.4 µM epinephrine had a higher incidence of the 30 day primary cardiovascular endpoint (37.2% vs. 15.3% in those without hyperreactivity, adjusted HR 2.76, 95% CI 1.5-5.1, p = 0.002). PRESS performs well in identifying a hyperreactive phenotype in patients with PAD (AUC [cross-validation] 0.81, 95% CI 0.68 -0.94, n = 84) and in an independent cohort of healthy participants (AUC [validation] 0.77, 95% CI 0.75 -0.79, n = 35). Following multivariable adjustment, PAD individuals with a PRESS score above the median are at higher risk for a future cardiovascular event (adjusted HR 1.90, CI 1.07-3.36; p = 0.027, n = 129, NCT02106429). This study derives and validates the ability of PRESS to discriminate platelet hyperreactivity and identify those at increased cardiovascular risk. Future studies in a larger independent cohort are warranted for further validation. The development of a platelet reactivity expression score opens the possibility for a personalized approach to antithrombotic therapy for cardiovascular risk reduction., (© 2024. The Author(s).)