Early invasive and non-invasive approach in the treatment of non-ST elevation acute coronary syndrome

  • Authors: Akinina S.A.1, Mayorova T.A.1, Belousov V.V.1, Shalaev S.V.1, Akinina SA2, Maiorova TA2, Belousov VV2, Shalaev SV3
  • Affiliations:
    1. Regional hospital, Khanty-Mansiysk
    2. Regional hospital, Tyumen
  • Issue: Vol 83, No 9 (2011)
  • Pages: 20-24
  • Section: Editorial
  • URL: https://ter-arkhiv.ru/0040-3660/article/view/30896
  • Cite item

Abstract


Aim. The aim of the study is to assess the efficiency of early invasive treatment versus conservative treatment for patients with non-ST acute coronary syndrome (ACS), and to study immediate results of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in terms of the risk of adverse events.
Material and methods. The investigation includes 112 patients with non-ST ACS having risk of adverse outcome determined by the GRACE system. More than half of the patients (77/68.8%) underwent diagnostic coronary angiography within 72 hours of admission, and the decision was made on a subsequent treatment strategy (early invasive or conservative approach). In-hospital outcomes (cardiac deaths, nonfatal MI, reMI), cumulative frequency of these events have been studied according to the risk assessment scale GRACE and treatment strategy.
Results. Low risk was determined in 33.9% of patients, intermediate - in 32.1%, and high - in 33.9%. On the whole, frequency of myocardial revascularization was assessed as 56.3%. Fifty-one (45.5%) patients received early invasive treatment, 12 (10.7%) - coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). A conservative approach was used in 49 cases (43.8%). An early invasive treatment was given to 20 patients (52.6%) from each of the low- and high-risk groups, 11 (30.6%) - from the intermediate risk group. In-hospital cardiac deaths were observed only in the high-risk group, and this number was higher in case of conservative treatment versus early invasive treatment: 3 (30%) versus 1 (50%). Non-fatal MIs in the form of re(MI) were also diagnosed only in the high-risk group following conservative treatment: 2 (20.0%). Nevertheless, no reliable difference in the frequency of each complication was found (p = 0.095; p = 0.1). Significant differences in the high-risk group were proven while comparing the impact of early invasive and conservative approaches on the cumulative frequency of in-hospital death and (re)MI cases (50.0% versus 5.0%; p = 0.009). No benefits of an early invasive approach were identified for low-risk and intermediate risk groups.
Conclusion. Early invasive approach compared with a conservative approach in high risk patients with non-ST acute coronary syndrome can improve clinical outcomes with a decrease in the total frequency of in-hospital death, reMI.

About the authors

Svetlana Andreevna Akinina

Email: nordcardiolog@mail.ru

Tat'yana Afanas'evna Mayorova

Email: hospital@okbhmao.ru

Valeriy Vasil'evich Belousov

Email: hospital@okbhmao.ru

Sergey Vasil'evich Shalaev

Email: Shalaev@tokb.ru

S A Akinina

Regional hospital, Khanty-Mansiysk

Regional hospital, Khanty-Mansiysk

T A Maiorova

Regional hospital, Khanty-Mansiysk

Regional hospital, Khanty-Mansiysk

V V Belousov

Regional hospital, Khanty-Mansiysk

Regional hospital, Khanty-Mansiysk

S V Shalaev

Regional hospital, Tyumen

Regional hospital, Tyumen

References

  1. Аверков О. В. Фондапаринукс и инвазивное лечение острого коронарного синдрома без подъемов сегмента ST на ЭКГ. Кардиология 2008; 12: 49-54.
  2. Чазов Е. И., Бойцов С. А. Оказание медицинской помощи больным с острым коронарным синдромом в рамках программы создания региональных и первичных сосудистых центров в Российской Федерации. Кардиол. вестн. 2008; 3 (2): 5-11.
  3. Mehta S. R., Cannon C. P., Fox K. A. et al. Routine vs selective invasive strategies in patients with acute coronary syndromes: a collaborative meta-analysis of randomized trials. J. A. M. A. 2005; 293: 2908-2917.
  4. Bavry A. A., Kumbhani D. J., Quiroz R. et al. Invasive therapy along with glicoprotein II/III a inhibitors and intracoronary stents improves survival in non-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes: a meta-analysis and review of the literature. Am. J. Cardiol. 2004; 93: 830-835.
  5. Bhatt D. L. To cath or not to cath: that is no longer the question. J. A. M. A. 2005; 293 (23): 2935-2937.
  6. Persukov L., Batyraliev T., Niazova-Karben Z. et al. Direct coronary stenting in acute coronary syndromes. In: Proceeting of the 4th International congress on coronary artery disease "Advances in coronary artery disease", Prague, Czech Republic, Oct. 21-24, 2001: 677-682.
  7. The Task Force for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Non-ST Elevation Acute Coronary Syndrome of the European Society of Cardiology. Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes. Eur. Heart J. 2007; 28: 1598-1660.
  8. Braunwald E., Antman E. M., Beasley J. W. et al. ACC/AHA 2002 guideline update for the management of patients with unstable angina and non-ST segment elevation myocardial infarction: summary article. A report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (Committee on the Management of Patients With Unstable Angina). Circulation 2002; 106: 1893-1900.
  9. Guidelines for the American College of Cardiology / American Heart Association 2007 for the management of patients with unstable angina/Non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 2007; 50: 1-157.
  10. Всероссийское научное общество кардиологов. Рекомендации по лечению острого коронарного синдрома без стойкого подъема сегмента ST на ЭКГ. Кардиология 2006; 4 (прил.): 1-28.
  11. Thygesen K., Alpert J. S., White H. D. On behalf of Joint European Society of Cardiology/American College of Cardiology/ American Heart Association/World Heart Federation Task Force for the Redefinition of Myocardial Infarction. Universal definition of myocardial infarction. Circulation 2007; 22: 2634-2653.
  12. Явелов И. С. Раннее инвазивное лечение острого коронарного синдрома без подъемов сегмента ST: время менять рекомендации? Результаты исследования ICTUS. Кардиология 2005; 1: 77-79.
  13. Подготовлено Грацианским Н. А. Immediate versus next day catheterization in Non-ST elevation acute coronary syndrome: Results of the multicenter randomized ABOARD study. Presented by Dr. Gilles Montalescot at ACC.09/i2, Orlando. FL. March 2009.
  14. Явелов И. С. Отдаленные исходы при раннем инвазивном и неинвазивном подходах к лечению острого коронарного синдрома без стойких подъемов сегмента ST на ЭКГ: результаты 5-летнего наблюдения в исследовании FRISC-II. Кардиология 2006; 12: 55-56.
  15. Lagerqvist B., Huster S., Kontny F. et al. Fast Revascularisation During Instability in Coronary Artery Disease (FRISC-II) Investigators. 5-year outcomes in the FRISC-II randomysed trial of an invasive versus a non-invasive strategy in non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome: a follow-up study. Lancet 2006; 368: 998-1004.
  16. Cannon C. P., Wentraub W. S., Demopoulos L. A. et al. Comparison of early invasive and conservative strategies in patients with unstable coronary syndromes treated with the glycoprotein Ilb/IIIa inhibitor tirofiban. N. Engl. J. Med. 2001; 344: 1879-1887.

Statistics

Views

Abstract - 51

Cited-By


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
 

Address of the Editorial Office:

  • Novij Zykovskij proezd, 3, 40, Moscow, 125167

Correspondence address:

  • Novoslobodskaya str 31c4., Moscow, 127005, Russian Federation

Managing Editor:

 

© 2018 "Consilium Medicum" Publishing house

This website uses cookies

You consent to our cookies if you continue to use our website.

About Cookies