Troponin: an important prognostic marker and risk-stratification tool in non–ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes

AbstractOver the past decade, there has been a progressive evolution of cardiac marker testing in patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS). This has not only resulted in a dramatic shift in how we view the diagnosis of myocardial infarction (MI), but it has also extended the role of cardiac marker testing into risk stratification and guidance of treatment decisions. By the year 2000, the development of highly sensitive and cardiac-specific troponin assays had resulted in a consensus change in the definition of MI, placing increased emphasis on cardiac-marker testing with troponins as the new gold standard. Furthermore, and perhaps more importantly, the role of the troponins as superior markers of subsequent cardiac risk in ACS patients became firmly established. Most recently, the supportive role of these markers in identifying patients with ACS who may derive particular benefit from potent anti-thrombotic and anti-platelet therapy or early invasive treatment strategies has been demonstrated. This paper will review the evolution of these important roles of troponin testing for risk stratification in ACS

Intra-aortic balloon counterpulsation in US and non-US centres: results of the Benchmark® Registry

Aims To examine differences in patient characteristics and outcomes in 19 636 patients enrolled in the USA and 3027 patients enrolled in other countries undergoing intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) counterpulsation. Methods and results Indications for IABP use; a larger percentage of US patients were identified as ‘early support and stabilization for angiography or angioplasty' (21.1% US vs 11.8% non-US), and ‘pre-operative support for high-risk CABG' (15.9% vs 6.6%). A smaller percentage of US patients vs non-US patients were identified as ‘weaning from cardiopulmonary bypass' (14.3% vs 28.2%), and ‘refractory ventricular failure' (6.2% vs 9.8%). One out of five patients in both groups was listed as ‘cardiogenic shock' (18.9% US vs 20.2% non-US). All cause, risk-adjusted, in-hospital mortality (20.1% vs 28.7%; P<0.001), and mortality with IABP in place (10.8% vs 18.0%; P<0.001) were lower at US vs non-US sites. In both US and non-US institutions, IABP associated complication rates, such as IABP-related mortality (0.05% vs 0.07%), major limb ischaemia (0.9% vs 0.8%), and severe bleeding (0.9% vs 0.8%), were low. Conclusions IABP counterpulsation is deployed at an earlier clinical stage in US patients. Mortality rates are higher for non-US patients, particularly for patients with non-surgery cardiac interventions, even after adjusting for risk factors. Complication rates were low. Physicians should therefore not be reluctant to use IABP in high-risk patients undergoing cardiac procedure

Clinical outcomes after detection of elevated cardiac enzymes in patients undergoing percutaneous intervention

AbstractObjectives. We examined the relations of elevated creatine kinase (CK) and its myocardial band isoenzyme (CK-MB) to clinical outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients enrolled in Integrilin (eptifibatide) to Minimize Platelet Aggregation and Coronary Thrombosis-II (trial) (IMPACT-II), a trial of the platelet glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitor eptifibatide.Background. Elevation of cardiac enzymes often occurs after PCI, but its clinical implications are uncertain.Methods. Patients undergoing elective, scheduled PCI for any indication were analyzed. Parallel analyses investigated CK (n = 3,535) and CK-MB (n = 2,341) levels after PCI (within 4 to 20 h). Clinical outcomes at 30 days and 6 months were stratified by postprocedure CK and CK-MB (multiple of the site’s upper normal limit).Results. Overall, 1,779 patients (76%) had no CK-MB elevation; CK-MB levels were elevated to 1 to 3 times the upper normal limit in 323 patients (13.8%), to 3 to 5 times normal in 84 (3.6%), to 5 to 10 times normal in 86 (3.7%), and to >10 times normal in 69 patients (2.9%). Elevated CK-MB was associated with an increased risk of death, reinfarction, or emergency revascularization at 30 days, and of death, reinfarction, or surgical revascularization at 6 months. Elevated total CK to above three times normal was less frequent, but its prognostic significance paralleled that seen for CK-MB. The degree of risk correlated with the rise in CK or CK-MB, even for patients with successful procedures not complicated by abrupt closure.Conclusions. Elevations in cardiac enzymes, including small increases (between one and three times normal) often not considered an infarction, are associated with an increased risk for short-term adverse clinical outcomes after successful or unsuccessful PCI

Provisional stenting strategies: systematic overview and implications for clinical decision-making

AbstractCoronary stents reduce the rates of abrupt closure, emergency coronary artery bypass graft surgery and restenosis, but do not prevent myocardial infarction or death at six months. The financial burden of increased stent use and the difficulty in managing in-stent restenosis have provided the impetus to develop provisional stenting strategies. Patients at low risk for restenosis after balloon angioplasty may not derive additional benefit from stent implantation and may be successfully managed with percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (PTCA) alone. Numerous patient, lesion and procedural predictors of restenosis have been identified. Postprocedural assessment using quantitative coronary angiography, intravascular ultrasound (IVUS), coronary flow velocity reserve (CVR) or fractional flow reserve (FFR) may further enhance the ability to predict adverse outcomes after PTCA. Several studies have been performed to investigate the feasibility of provisional stenting strategies using various modalities to identify low risk patients who could be managed with PTCA alone. An optimal or “stent-like” angiographic result after PTCA is associated with favorable clinical outcomes. Preliminary results of studies using IVUS or CVR to guide provisional stenting appear promising. Angiography alone may be inadequate to identify truly low risk patients and may need to be combined with clinical factors, assessment of recoil, IVUS or physiologic indexes. Strategies that avoid unnecessary stenting in even a small proportion of patients may have large impacts on health care costs. Provisional stenting may potentially reduce costs and rates of in-stent restenosis without compromising the quality of health care delivery