Non ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome.

INTRODUCTION: Non ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS, here defined as unstable angina and non ST-elevation MI) is characterised by episodes of chest pain at rest or with minimal exertion, which increase in frequency or severity, often with dynamic ECG changes. Between 9% and 19% of people with NSTE-ACS die in the first 6 months after diagnosis, with about half of these deaths occurring within 4 weeks of diagnosis. METHODS AND OUTCOMES: We conducted a systematic review and aimed to answer the following clinical questions: What are the effects of: antiplatelet; antithrombin; anti-ischaemic; lipid-lowering; and invasive treatments? We searched: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and other important databases up to December 2009 (Clinical Evidence reviews are updated periodically, please check our website for the most up-to-date version of this review). We included harms alerts from relevant organisations such as the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA). RESULTS: We found 32 systematic reviews, RCTs, or observational studies that met our inclusion criteria. CONCLUSIONS: In this systematic review we present information relating to the effectiveness and safety of the following interventions: aspirin, beta-blockers, calcium channel blockers, clopidogrel, direct thrombin inhibitors, glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors (oral or intravenous), heparin (low molecular weight, unfractionated), fondaparinux, nitrates, routine early cardiac catheterisation and revascularisation, statins, and warfarin

Mechanical Thrombectomy for Acute Ischemic Stroke A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials

AbstractBackgroundAcute ischemic stroke is a leading cause of serious disability and death worldwide. Individual randomized trials have shown possible benefits of mechanical thrombectomy after usual care compared with usual care alone (i.e., intravenous thrombolysis) in the management of acute ischemic stroke patients.ObjectivesThis study systematically determined if mechanical thrombectomy after usual care would be associated with better outcomes in patients with acute ischemic stroke caused by large artery occlusion.MethodsThe authors included randomized trials that compared mechanical thrombectomy after usual care versus usual care alone for acute ischemic stroke. Random effects summary risk ratios (RR) were constructed using a DerSimonian and Laird model.ResultsNine trials with 2,410 patients were available for analysis. Compared with usual care alone, mechanical thrombectomy was associated with a higher incidence of achieving good functional outcome, defined as a modified Rankin scale (mRS) of 0 to 2 (RR: 1.45; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.22 to 1.72; p < 0.0001) and excellent functional outcome defined as mRS 0 to 1 (RR: 1.67; 95% CI: 1.27 to 2.19; p < 0.0001) at 90 days. There was a trend toward reduced all-cause mortality with mechanical thrombectomy (RR: 0.86; 95% CI: 0.72 to 1.02; p = 0.09). The risk of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage was similar with either treatment modality (RR 1.06: 95% CI: 0.73 to 1.55; p = 0.76).ConclusionsIn acute ischemic stroke due to large artery occlusion, mechanical thrombectomy after usual care was associated with improved functional outcomes compared with usual care alone, and was found to be relatively safe, with no excess in intracranial hemorrhage. There was a trend for reduction in all-cause mortality with mechanical thrombectomy

Effects of Verapamil SR and Atenolol on 24-Hour Blood Pressure and Heart Rate in Hypertension Patients with Coronary Artery Disease...

Elevated night-time blood pressure (BP) and heart rate (HR), increased BP and HR variability, and altered diurnal variations of BP and HR (nighttime dipping and morning surge) in patients with systemic hypertension are each associated with increased adverse cardiovascular events. However, there are no reports on the effect of hypertension treatment on these important hemodynamic parameters in the growing population of hypertensive patients with atherosclerotic coronary artery disease (CAD). This was a pre-specified subgroup analysis of the INternational VErapamil SR-Trandolapril STudy (INVEST), which involved 22,576 clinically stable patients aged ≥50 years with hypertension and CAD randomized to either verapamil SR- or atenolol-based hypertension treatment strategies. The subgroup consisted of 117 patients undergoing 24-hour ambulatory monitoring at baseline and after 1 year of treatment. Hourly systolic and diastolic BP (SBP and DBP) decreased after 1 year for both verapamil SR- and atenolol-based treatment strategies compared with baseline (P<0.0001). Atenolol also decreased hourly HR (P<0.0001). Both treatment strategies decreased SBP variability (weighted standard deviation: P = 0.012 and 0.021, respectively). Compared with verapamil SR, atenolol also increased the prevalence of BP and HR night-time dipping among prior non-dippers (BP: OR = 3.37; 95% CI: 1.26 – 8.97; P = 0.015; HR: OR = 4.06; 95% CI: 1.35-12.17;P = 0.012) and blunted HR morning surge (+2.8 vs. +4.5 beats/min/hr; P = 0.019). Both verapamil SR- and especially atenolol-based strategies resulted in favorable changes in ambulatory monitoring parameters that have been previously associated with increased adverse cardiovascular events

Benefit of Early Invasive Therapy in Acute Coronary Syndromes A Meta-Analysis of Contemporary Randomized Clinical Trials

ObjectivesThis study sought to systematically determine whether early invasive therapy improves survival and reduces adverse cardiovascular events in the management of non–ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes.BackgroundAlthough early invasive therapy reduces recurrent unstable angina, the magnitude of benefit on other important adverse outcomes is unknown.MethodsClinical trials that randomized non–ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome patients to early invasive therapy versus a more conservative approach were included for analysis.ResultsIn all there were 7 trials with 8,375 patients available for analysis. At a mean follow-up of 2 years, the incidence of all-cause mortality was 4.9% in the early invasive group, compared with 6.5% in the conservative group (risk ratio [RR] = 0.75, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.63 to 0.90, p = 0.001), and at 1 month (RR = 0.82, 95% CI 0.50 to 1.34, p = 0.43). At 2 years of follow-up, the incidence of nonfatal myocardial infarction was 7.6% in the invasive group, versus 9.1% in the conservative group (RR = 0.83, 95% CI 0.72 to 0.96, p = 0.012), and at 1 month (RR = 0.93, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.19, p = 0.57). At a mean of 13 months of follow-up, there was a reduction in rehospitalization for unstable angina (RR = 0.69, 95% CI 0.65 to 0.74, p < 0.0001).ConclusionsManaging non–ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes by early invasive therapy improves long-term survival and reduces late myocardial infarction and rehospitalization for unstable angina

Improvement of Subjective Well-Being by Ranolazine in Patients with Chronic Angina and Known Myocardial Ischemia (IMWELL Study)

Introduction: We aimed to assess if ranolazine would improve angina symptoms among patients with documented myocardial ischemia. Methods: Eligible subjects had chronic stable angina and at least one coronary stenosis with fractional flow reserve (FFR) ≤0.80 or at least one chronic total occlusion (CTO) without attempted revascularization. Subjects were randomized to oral ranolazine 500 mg twice daily for 1 week, then ranolazine 1000 mg twice daily for 15 weeks versus matching placebo. The primary end point was change in angina at 16 weeks as assessed by the Seattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ). Results: Between September 2014 and January 2016, 25 subjects were randomized to ranolazine versus 25 to placebo. The most common reason for eligibility was CTO (72%), while the remainder had myocardial ischemia documented by low FFR. The mean FFR was 0.57 ± 0.12. Sixty-eight percent of subjects were on two or more anti-angina medications at baseline. Study medication was discontinued in 32% (eight of 25) of the ranolazine group versus 36% (nine of 25) of the placebo group. By intention-to-treat, 46 subjects had baseline and follow-up SAQ data completed. Ranolazine was not associated with an improvement in angina compared with placebo at 16 weeks. The results were similar among 33 subjects that completed study medication. The incidence of ischemia-driven hospitalization or catheterization was 12% (three of 25) of the ranolazine group versus 20% (five of 25) in the placebo group (p \u3e 0.05). Conclusions: In subjects with chronic stable angina and documented myocardial ischemia, ranolazine did not improve angina symptoms at 16 weeks

Simple Integer Risk Score to Determine Prognosis of Patients With Hypertension and Chronic Stable Coronary Artery Disease

Background: It is difficult to accurately determine prognosis of patients with hypertension and chronic stable coronary artery disease (CAD). Our aim was to construct a risk score for predicting important adverse events in this population. Methods and Results: Patients with hypertension and chronic stable CAD enrolled in the INternational VErapamil‐SR/Trandolapril STudy (INVEST) comprised the study cohort. Candidate predictor variables were obtained from patients with at least 1 postbaseline visit. Patients were divided into development (n=18 484) and validation cohorts (n=2054). Cox regression model identified predictors of the primary outcome: all‐cause mortality, myocardial infarction, or stroke at a mean follow‐up of 2.3 years. The hazard ratio of each variable was rounded to the nearest integer to construct score weights. A score 0 to 4 defined low‐risk, 5 to 6 intermediate‐risk and ≥7 high‐risk. The following variables were retained in the final model: age, residence, body mass index, on‐treatment heart rate and BP, prior myocardial infarction, heart failure, stroke/transient ischemic attack, smoking, diabetes, peripheral arterial disease, and chronic kidney disease. The primary outcome occurred in 2.9% of the low‐risk group, 6.5% of the intermediate‐risk group, and 18.0% of the high‐risk group (P for trend <0.0001). The model was good at discriminating those who had an event versus those who did not (C‐statistic=0.75). The model performed well in a validation cohort (C‐statistic=0.77). Conclusion: Readily available clinical variables can rapidly stratify patients with hypertension and chronic stable CAD into useful risk categories

Effects of Verapamil SR and Atenolol on 24-Hour Blood Pressure and Heart Rate in Hypertension Patients with Coronary Artery Disease...

Elevated night-time blood pressure (BP) and heart rate (HR), increased BP and HR variability, and altered diurnal variations of BP and HR (nighttime dipping and morning surge) in patients with systemic hypertension are each associated with increased adverse cardiovascular events. However, there are no reports on the effect of hypertension treatment on these important hemodynamic parameters in the growing population of hypertensive patients with atherosclerotic coronary artery disease (CAD). This was a pre-specified subgroup analysis of the INternational VErapamil SR-Trandolapril STudy (INVEST), which involved 22,576 clinically stable patients aged ≥50 years with hypertension and CAD randomized to either verapamil SR- or atenolol-based hypertension treatment strategies. The subgroup consisted of 117 patients undergoing 24-hour ambulatory monitoring at baseline and after 1 year of treatment. Hourly systolic and diastolic BP (SBP and DBP) decreased after 1 year for both verapamil SR- and atenolol-based treatment strategies compared with baseline (P<0.0001). Atenolol also decreased hourly HR (P<0.0001). Both treatment strategies decreased SBP variability (weighted standard deviation: P = 0.012 and 0.021, respectively). Compared with verapamil SR, atenolol also increased the prevalence of BP and HR night-time dipping among prior non-dippers (BP: OR = 3.37; 95% CI: 1.26 – 8.97; P = 0.015; HR: OR = 4.06; 95% CI: 1.35-12.17;P = 0.012) and blunted HR morning surge (+2.8 vs. +4.5 beats/min/hr; P = 0.019). Both verapamil SR- and especially atenolol-based strategies resulted in favorable changes in ambulatory monitoring parameters that have been previously associated with increased adverse cardiovascular events

Early Invasive Strategy and In‐Hospital Survival Among Diabetics With Non‐ST‐Elevation Acute Coronary Syndromes: A Contemporary National Insight

Background: There are limited data on the merits of an early invasive strategy in diabetics with non‐ST‐elevation acute coronary syndrome, with unclear influence of this strategy on survival. The aim of this study was to evaluate the in‐hospital survival of diabetics with non‐ST‐elevation acute coronary syndrome treated with an early invasive strategy compared with an initial conservative strategy. Methods and Results: The National Inpatient Sample database, years 2012–2013, was queried for diabetics with a primary diagnosis of non‐ST‐elevation acute coronary syndrome defined as either non‐ST‐elevation myocardial infarction or unstable angina (unstable angina). An early invasive strategy was defined as coronary angiography±revascularization within 48 hours of admission. Propensity scores were used to assemble a cohort managed with either an early invasive or initial conservative strategy balanced on \u3e50 baseline characteristics and hospital presentations. Incidence of in‐hospital mortality was compared in both groups. In a cohort of 363 500 diabetics with non‐ST‐elevation acute coronary syndrome, 164 740 (45.3%) were treated with an early invasive strategy. Propensity scoring matched 21 681 diabetics in both arms. Incidence of in‐hospital mortality was lower with an early invasive strategy in both the unadjusted (2.0% vs 4.8%; odds ratio [OR], 0.41; 95% CI, 0.39–0.42; P\u3c0.0001) and propensity‐matched models (2.2% vs 3.8%; OR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.50–0.63; P\u3c0.0001). The benefit was observed across various subgroups, except for patients with unstable angina (Pinteraction=0.02). Conclusions: An early invasive strategy may be associated with a lower incidence of in‐hospital mortality in patients with diabetes. The benefit of this strategy appears to be superior in patients presenting with non‐ST‐elevation myocardial infarction compared with unstable angina