CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

Acute Coronary Syndrom

Abstract

Recommended Article

Mortality and morbidity in acutely ill adults treated with liberal versus conservative oxygen therapy (IOTA): a systematic review and meta-analysis Australian Trends in Procedural Characteristics and Outcomes in Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction Association of Silent Myocardial Infarction and Sudden Cardiac Death Diagnosis and Prognosis of Coronary Artery Disease with SPECT and PET Impact of tissue protrusion after coronary stenting in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction Characterization of lesions undergoing ischemia-driven revascularization after complete revascularization versus culprit lesion only in patients with STEMI and multivessel disease - A DANAMI-3-PRIMULTI substudy National Quality Assessment of Early Clopidogrel Therapy in Chinese Patients With Acute Myocardial Infarction (AMI) in 2006 and 2011: Insights From the China Patient-Centered Evaluative Assessment of Cardiac Events (PEACE)-Retrospective AMI Study Early Natural History of Spontaneous Coronary Artery Dissection

Clinical Trial28 Aug 2018

JOURNAL:Circulation. Article Link

Early Versus Standard Care Invasive Examination and Treatment of Patients with Non-ST-Segment Elevation Acute Coronary Syndrome: The VERDICT (Very EaRly vs Deferred Invasive evaluation using Computerized Tomography) - Randomized Controlled Trial

KF Kofoed , H Kelbæk , PR Hansen et al. Keywords: Optimal timing; invasive coronary angiography; Non-ST-Segment Elevation Acute Coronary Syndrome

ABSTRACT


BACKGROUND - The optimal timing of invasive coronary angiography (ICA) and revascularization in patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS) is not well defined. We tested the hypothesis, that a strategy of very early invasive coronary angiography (ICA) and possible revascularization within 12 hours of diagnosis, is superior to an invasive strategy performed within 48-72 hours in terms of clinical outcomes.


METHODS - Patients admitted with clinical suspicion of NSTE-ACS in the Capital Region of Copenhagen, Denmark were screened for inclusion in the VERDICT trial (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02061891). Patients with ECG changes indicating new ischemia and/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 48-72 hours. The primary endpoint was a combination of all-cause death, non-fatal 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) of the patients. Within a median follow-up time of 4.3 (IQR 4.1-4.4) years the primary endpoint occurred in 296 (27.5%) of participants in the very early ICA group and 316 (29.5%) in the standard care group (HR 0.92 [CI95 0.78-1.08]). Among patients with a GRACE risk score >140, a very early invasive treatment strategy improved the primary outcome compared with the standard invasive treatment (HR 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 2-3 days in patients with NSTE-ACS. However, in patients with the highest risk, very early invasive therapy improves long-term outcomes.


Clinical Trial Registration: URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov Unique Identifier: NCT02061891