Survival following coronary angioplasty versus coronary artery bypass surgery in anatomic subsets in which coronary artery bypass surgery improves survival compared with medical therapy Results from the Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation (BARI)

AbstractOBJECTIVESWe sought to compare survival after coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) and percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (PTCA) in high-risk anatomic subsets.BACKGROUNDCompared with medical therapy, CABG decreases mortality in patients with three-vessel disease and two-vessel disease involving the proximal left anterior descending artery (LAD), particularly if left ventricular (LV) dysfunction is present. How survival after PTCA and CABG compares in these high-risk anatomic subsets is unknown.METHODSIn the Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation (BARI), 1,829 patients with multivessel disease were randomized to an initial strategy of PTCA or CABG between 1988 and 1991. Stents and IIb/IIIa inhibitors were not utilized. Since patients in BARI with diabetes mellitus had greater survival with CABG, separate analyses of patients without diabetes were performed.RESULTSSeven-year survival among patients with three-vessel disease undergoing PTCA and CABG (n = 754) was 79% versus 84% (p = 0.06), respectively, and 85% versus 87% (p = 0.36) when only non-diabetics (n = 592) were analyzed. In patients with three-vessel disease and reduced LV function (ejection fraction <50%), seven-year survival was 70% versus 74% (p = 0.6) in all PTCA and CABG patients (n = 176), and 82% versus 73% (p = 0.29) among non-diabetic patients (n = 124). Seven-year survival was 87% versus 84% (p = 0.9) in all PTCA and CABG patients (including diabetics) with two-vessel disease involving the proximal LAD (n = 352), and 78% versus 71% (p = 0.7) in patients with two-vessel disease involving the proximal LAD with reduced LV function (n = 72).CONCLUSIONIn high–risk anatomic subsets in which survival is prolonged by CABG versus medical therapy, revascularization by PTCA and CABG yielded equivalent survival over seven years

Double-Dose Versus Standard-Dose Clopidogrel According to Smoking Status Among Patients With Acute Coronary Syndromes Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

Background: Prior Studies have suggested better outcomes in smokers compared with nonsmokers receiving clopidogrel (“smoker's paradox”). The impact of a more intensive clopidogrel regimen on ischemic and bleeding risks in smokers with acute coronary syndromes requiring percutaneous coronary interventions remains unclear. Methods and Results: We analyzed 17 263 acute coronary syndrome patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention from the CURRENT‐OASIS 7 (Clopidogrel and Aspirin Optimal Dose Usage to Reduce Recurrent Events—Seventh Organization to Assess Strategies in Ischemic Symptoms) trial, which compared double‐dose (600 mg day 1;150 mg days 2–7; then 75 mg daily) versus standard‐dose (300 mg day 1; then 75 mg daily) clopidogrel in acute coronary syndrome patients. The primary outcome was cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke at 30 days. Interactions between treatment allocation and smoking status (current smokers versus nonsmokers) were evaluated. Overall, 6394 patients (37.0%) were current smokers. For the comparison of double‐ versus standard‐dose clopidogrel, there were significant interactions in smokers and nonsmokers for the primary outcome (P=0.031) and major bleeding (P=0.002). Double‐ versus standard‐dose clopidogrel reduced the primary outcome among smokers by 34% (hazard ratio [HR] 0.66, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.50–0.87, P=0.003), whereas in nonsmokers, there was no apparent benefit (HR 0.96, 95% CI, 0.80–1.14, P=0.61). For major bleeding, there was no difference between the groups in smokers (HR 0.77, 95% CI, 0.48–1.24, P=0.28), whereas in nonsmokers, the double‐dose clopidogrel regimen increased bleeding (HR 1.89, 95% CI, 1.37–2.60, P<0.0001). Double‐dose clopidogrel reduced the incidence of definite stent thrombosis in smokers (HR 0.41, 95% CI, 0.24–0.71) and nonsmokers (HR 0.63, 95% CI, 0.42–0.93; P for interaction=0.19). Conclusions: In smokers, a double‐dose clopidogrel regimen reduced major cardiovascular events and stent thrombosis after percutaneous coronary intervention, with no increase in major bleeding. This suggests that clopidogrel dosing in patients with acute coronary syndromes should be personalized, taking into consideration both ischemic and bleeding risk. Clinical Trial Registration URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00335452

ACC/AHA Guidelines for the Management of Patients With ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction—Executive Summary A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (Writing Committee to Revise the 1999 Guidelines for the Management of Patients With Acute Myocardial Infarction)

Although considerable improvement has occurred in the process of care for patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), room for improvement exists (1–3). The purpose of the present guideline is to focus on the numerous advances in the diagnosis and management of patients with STEMI since 1999. This is reflected in the changed name of the guideline: “ACC/AHA Guidelines for the Management of Patients With ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction.” The final recommendations for indications for a diagnostic procedure, a particular therapy, or an intervention in patients with STEMI summarize both clinical evidence and expert opinion (Table 1).To provide clinicians with a set of recommendations that can easily be translated into the practice of caring for patients with STEMI, this guideline is organized around the chronology of the interface between the patient and the clinician. The full guideline is available at http://www.acc.org/clinical/guidelines/stemi/index.htm