CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

急性冠脉综合征

Abstract

Recommended Article

Prevalence and Prognosis of Unrecognized Myocardial Infarction Determined by Cardiac Magnetic Resonance in Older Adults Pharmacotherapy in the Management of Anxiety and Pain During Acute Coronary Syndromes and the Risk of Developing Symptoms of Posttraumatic Stress Disorder The Prognostic Significance of Periprocedural Infarction in the Era of Potent Antithrombotic Therapy: The PRAGUE-18 Substudy Transition of Macrophages to Fibroblast-Like Cells in Healing Myocardial Infarction Intravenous Statin Administration During Myocardial Infarction Compared With Oral Post-Infarct Administration Invasive Management of Acute Myocardial Infarction Complicated by Cardiogenic Shock: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association TACIT (High Sensitivity Troponin T Rules Out Acute Cardiac Insufficiency Trial): An Observational Study to Identify Acute Heart Failure Patients at Low Risk for Rehospitalization or Mortality Another Nail in the Coffin for Intra-Aortic Balloon Counterpulsion in Acute Myocardial Infarction With Cardiogenic Shock

Original ResearchVolume 13, Issue 8, April 2020

JOURNAL:JACC: Cardiovascular Interventions Article Link

Optimal Timing of Intervention in NSTE-ACS Without Pre-Treatment The EARLY Randomized Trial

G Lemesle, M Laine, M Pankert et al. Keywords: non–ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome; outcome; PCI; pre-treatment; timing

ABSTRACT


OBJECTIVES - The aim of this study was to compare a delayed and a very early invasive strategy in patients with non–ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes (NSTE-ACS) without pre-treatment.

 

BACKGROUND - The optimal delay of the invasive strategy in patients with NSTE-ACS remains debated and has never been investigated in patients not pre-treated with P2Y12–adenosine diphosphate receptor antagonists.

 

METHODS - A prospective, open-label, randomized controlled trial was conducted. Altogether, 741 patients presenting with intermediate- or high-risk NSTE-ACS intended for an invasive strategy were included. The modified intention-to-treat analysis was composed of 709 patients after 32 withdrew consent. Patients were randomized 1:1 to the delayed invasive group (DG) (n = 363) with coronary angiography (CA) performed 12 to 72 h after randomization or the very early invasive group (EG) (n = 346) with CA within 2 h. No pre-treatment with a loading dose of a P2Y12–adenosine diphosphate receptor antagonist was allowed before CA. The primary endpoint was the composite of cardiovascular death and recurrent ischemic events at 1 month, as determined by a blinded adjudication committee.

 

RESULTS - Most patients had high-risk NSTE-ACS in both groups (93% in the EG vs. 92.5% in the DG). The median time between randomization and CA was 0 h (interquartile range [IQR]: 0 to 1 h) in the EG group and 18 h (IQR: 11 to 23 h) in the DG. The primary endpoint rate was significantly lower in the EG (4.4% vs. 21.3% in the DG; hazard ratio: 0.20; 95% confidence interval: 0.11 to 0.34; p < 0.001), driven by a reduction in recurrent ischemic events (19.8% vs. 2.9%; p < 0.001). No difference was observed for cardiovascular death.

 

CONCLUSIONS - Without pre-treatment, a very early invasive strategy was associated with a significant reduction in ischemic events at the time of percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with intermediate- and high-risk NSTE-ACS. (Early or Delayed Revascularization for Intermediate and High-Risk Non ST-Elevation Acute Coronary Syndromes; NCT02750579)