Back to Search Start Over

Immediate vs delayed intervention for acute coronary syndromes: a randomized clinical trial.

Authors :
Montalescot G
Cayla G
Collet JP
Elhadad S
Beygui F
Le Breton H
Choussat R
Leclercq F
Silvain J
Duclos F
Aout M
Dubois-Randé JL
Barthélémy O
Ducrocq G
Bellemain-Appaix A
Payot L
Steg PG
Henry P
Spaulding C
Vicaut E
Source :
JAMA: Journal of the American Medical Association; 9/2/2009, Vol. 302 Issue 9, p947-954, 8p
Publication Year :
2009

Abstract

<bold>Context: </bold>International guidelines recommend an early invasive strategy for patients with high-risk acute coronary syndromes without ST-segment elevation, but the optimal timing of intervention is uncertain.<bold>Objective: </bold>To determine whether immediate intervention on admission can result in a reduction of myocardial infarction compared with a delayed intervention.<bold>Design, Setting, and Patients: </bold>The Angioplasty to Blunt the Rise of Troponin in Acute Coronary Syndromes Randomized for an Immediate or Delayed Intervention (ABOARD) study, a randomized clinical trial that assigned, from August 2006 through September 2008 at 13 centers in France, 352 patients with acute coronary syndromes without ST-segment elevation and a Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) score of 3 or more to receive intervention either immediately or on the next working day (between 8 and 60 hours after enrollment).<bold>Main Outcome Measures: </bold>The primary end point was the peak troponin value during hospitalization; the key secondary end point was the composite of death, myocardial infarction, or urgent revascularization at 1-month follow-up.<bold>Results: </bold>Time from randomization to sheath insertion was 70 minutes with immediate intervention vs 21 hours with delayed intervention. The primary end point did not differ between the 2 strategies (median [interquartile range] troponin I value, 2.1 [0.3-7.1] ng/mL vs 1.7 [0.3-7.2] ng/mL in the immediate and delayed intervention groups, respectively; P = .70). The key secondary end point was observed in 13.7% (95% confidence interval, 8.6%-18.8%) of the group assigned to receive immediate intervention and 10.2% (95% confidence interval, 5.7%-14.6%) of the group assigned to receive delayed intervention (P = .31). The other end points, as well as major bleeding, did not differ between the 2 strategies.<bold>Conclusion: </bold>In patients with acute coronary syndromes without ST-segment elevation, a strategy of immediate intervention compared with a strategy of intervention deferred to the next working day (mean, 21 hours) did not result in a difference in myocardial infarction as defined by peak troponin level.<bold>Trial Registration: </bold>clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00442949. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Details

Language :
English
ISSN :
00987484
Volume :
302
Issue :
9
Database :
Complementary Index
Journal :
JAMA: Journal of the American Medical Association
Publication Type :
Academic Journal
Accession number :
105420835
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2009.1267