CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement

Abstract

Recommended Article

Infective Endocarditis After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Discrepancies in Measurement of the Thoracic Aorta: JACC Review Topic of the Week Frailty in Older Adults Undergoing Aortic Valve Replacement: The FRAILTY-AVR Study Aortic Valve Stenosis Treatment Disparities in the Underserved JACC Council Perspectives Frailty and Bleeding in Older Adults Undergoing TAVR or SAVR: Insights From the FRAILTY-AVR Study 5-Year Outcomes After TAVR With Balloon-Expandable Versus Self-Expanding Valves: Results From the CHOICE Randomized Clinical Trial Association Between Diastolic Dysfunction and Health Status Outcomes in Patients Undergoing Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Left ventricular remodelling and changes in functional measurements in patients undergoing transcatheter vs surgical aortic valve replacement: a head-to-head comparison

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 nonST-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 P2Y12adenosine 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 P2Y12adenosine 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)