| 1. |
- Spertus, John A, et al.
(författare)
-
Health-Status Outcomes with Invasive or Conservative Care in Coronary Disease.
- 2020
-
Ingår i: New England Journal of Medicine. - 0028-4793 .- 1533-4406. ; 382:15, s. 1408-1419
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BACKGROUND: In the ISCHEMIA trial, an invasive strategy with angiographic assessment and revascularization did not reduce clinical events among patients with stable ischemic heart disease and moderate or severe ischemia. A secondary objective of the trial was to assess angina-related health status among these patients.METHODS: We assessed angina-related symptoms, function, and quality of life with the Seattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ) at randomization, at months 1.5, 3, and 6, and every 6 months thereafter in participants who had been randomly assigned to an invasive treatment strategy (2295 participants) or a conservative strategy (2322). Mixed-effects cumulative probability models within a Bayesian framework were used to estimate differences between the treatment groups. The primary outcome of this health-status analysis was the SAQ summary score (scores range from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating better health status). All analyses were performed in the overall population and according to baseline angina frequency.RESULTS: At baseline, 35% of patients reported having no angina in the previous month. SAQ summary scores increased in both treatment groups, with increases at 3, 12, and 36 months that were 4.1 points (95% credible interval, 3.2 to 5.0), 4.2 points (95% credible interval, 3.3 to 5.1), and 2.9 points (95% credible interval, 2.2 to 3.7) higher with the invasive strategy than with the conservative strategy. Differences were larger among participants who had more frequent angina at baseline (8.5 vs. 0.1 points at 3 months and 5.3 vs. 1.2 points at 36 months among participants with daily or weekly angina as compared with no angina).CONCLUSIONS: In the overall trial population with moderate or severe ischemia, which included 35% of participants without angina at baseline, patients randomly assigned to the invasive strategy had greater improvement in angina-related health status than those assigned to the conservative strategy. The modest mean differences favoring the invasive strategy in the overall group reflected minimal differences among asymptomatic patients and larger differences among patients who had had angina at baseline. (Funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute and others; ISCHEMIA ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01471522.).
|
|
| 2. |
- Maron, David J., et al.
(författare)
-
Initial Invasive or Conservative Strategy for Stable Coronary Disease
- 2020
-
Ingår i: New England Journal of Medicine. - 0028-4793 .- 1533-4406. ; 382:15, s. 1395-1407
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Among patients with stable coronary disease and moderate or severe ischemia, whether clinical outcomes are better in those who receive an invasive intervention plus medical therapy than in those who receive medical therapy alone is uncertain.Methods: We randomly assigned 5179 patients with moderate or severe ischemia to an initial invasive strategy (angiography and revascularization when feasible) and medical therapy or to an initial conservative strategy of medical therapy alone and angiography if medical therapy failed. The primary outcome was a composite of death from cardiovascular causes, myocardial infarction, or hospitalization for unstable angina, heart failure, or resuscitated cardiac arrest. A key secondary outcome was death from cardiovascular causes or myocardial infarction.Results: Over a median of 3.2 years, 318 primary outcome events occurred in the invasive-strategy group and 352 occurred in the conservative-strategy group. At 6 months, the cumulative event rate was 5.3% in the invasive-strategy group and 3.4% in the conservative-strategy group (difference, 1.9 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.8 to 3.0); at 5 years, the cumulative event rate was 16.4% and 18.2%, respectively (difference, -1.8 percentage points; 95% CI, -4.7 to 1.0). Results were similar with respect to the key secondary outcome. The incidence of the primary outcome was sensitive to the definition of myocardial infarction; a secondary analysis yielded more procedural myocardial infarctions of uncertain clinical importance. There were 145 deaths in the invasive-strategy group and 144 deaths in the conservative-strategy group (hazard ratio, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.83 to 1.32).Conclusions: Among patients with stable coronary disease and moderate or severe ischemia, we did not find evidence that an initial invasive strategy, as compared with an initial conservative strategy, reduced the risk of ischemic cardiovascular events or death from any cause over a median of 3.2 years. The trial findings were sensitive to the definition of myocardial infarction that was used. (Funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute and others; ISCHEMIA ClinicalTrials.gov number, .) Patients with stable coronary disease were randomly assigned to an initial invasive strategy with angiography and revascularization if appropriate or to medical therapy alone. At 3.2 years, there was no significant difference between the groups with respect to the estimated rate of ischemic events. The findings were sensitive to the definition of myocardial infarction.
|
|
| 3. |
- Nguyen, Dan D., et al.
(författare)
-
Health Status and Clinical Outcomes in Older Adults With Chronic Coronary Disease
- 2023
-
Ingår i: Journal of the American College of Cardiology. - : Elsevier BV. - 0735-1097 .- 1558-3597. ; 81:17, s. 1697-1709
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BACKGROUND: Whether initial invasive management in older vs younger adults with chronic coronary disease and moderate or severe ischemia improves health status or clinical outcomes is unknown. OBJECTIVES The goal of this study was to examine the impact of age on health status and clinical outcomes with invasive vs conservative management in the ISCHEMIA (International Study of Comparative Health Effectiveness with Medical and Invasive Approaches) trial.METHODS: One-year angina-specific health status was assessed with the 7-item Seattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ) (score range 0-100; higher scores indicate better health status). Cox proportional hazards models estimated the treatment effect of invasive vs conservative management as a function of age on the composite clinical outcome of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or hospitalization for resuscitated cardiac arrest, unstable angina, or heart failure.RESULTS: Among 4,617 participants, 2,239 (48.5%) were aged <65 years, 1,713 (37.1%) were aged 65 to 74 years, and 665 (14.4%) were aged $75 years. Baseline SAQ summary scores were lower in participants aged <65 years. Fully adjusted differences in 1-year SAQ summary scores (invasive minus conservative) were 4.90 (95% CI: 3.56-6.24) at age 55 years, 3.48 (95% CI: 2.40-4.57) at age 65 years, and 2.13 (95% CI: 0.75-3.51) at age 75 years (Pinteraction = 0.008). Improvement in SAQ Angina Frequency was less dependent on age (Pinteraction = 0.08). There were no age differences between invasive vs conservative management on the composite clinical outcome (Pinteraction = 0.29).CONCLUSIONS: Older patients with chronic coronary disease and moderate or severe ischemia had consistent improvement in angina frequency but less improvement in angina-related health status with invasive management compared with younger patients. Invasive management was not associated with improved clinical outcomes in older or younger patients.
|
|
| 4. |
- Bangalore, Sripal, et al.
(författare)
-
Management of Coronary Disease in Patients with Advanced Kidney Disease.
- 2020
-
Ingår i: New England Journal of Medicine. - 0028-4793 .- 1533-4406. ; 382:17, s. 1608-1618
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BACKGROUND: Clinical trials that have assessed the effect of revascularization in patients with stable coronary disease have routinely excluded those with advanced chronic kidney disease.METHODS: We randomly assigned 777 patients with advanced kidney disease and moderate or severe ischemia on stress testing to be treated with an initial invasive strategy consisting of coronary angiography and revascularization (if appropriate) added to medical therapy or an initial conservative strategy consisting of medical therapy alone and angiography reserved for those in whom medical therapy had failed. The primary outcome was a composite of death or nonfatal myocardial infarction. A key secondary outcome was a composite of death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or hospitalization for unstable angina, heart failure, or resuscitated cardiac arrest.RESULTS: At a median follow-up of 2.2 years, a primary outcome event had occurred in 123 patients in the invasive-strategy group and in 129 patients in the conservative-strategy group (estimated 3-year event rate, 36.4% vs. 36.7%; adjusted hazard ratio, 1.01; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.79 to 1.29; P = 0.95). Results for the key secondary outcome were similar (38.5% vs. 39.7%; hazard ratio, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.79 to 1.29). The invasive strategy was associated with a higher incidence of stroke than the conservative strategy (hazard ratio, 3.76; 95% CI, 1.52 to 9.32; P = 0.004) and with a higher incidence of death or initiation of dialysis (hazard ratio, 1.48; 95% CI, 1.04 to 2.11; P = 0.03).CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with stable coronary disease, advanced chronic kidney disease, and moderate or severe ischemia, we did not find evidence that an initial invasive strategy, as compared with an initial conservative strategy, reduced the risk of death or nonfatal myocardial infarction. (Funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute and others; ISCHEMIA-CKD ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01985360.).
|
|
| 5. |
- Gaudino, Mario, et al.
(författare)
-
European Association of Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS) expert consensus statement on perioperative myocardial infarction after cardiac surgery.
- 2024
-
Ingår i: European journal of cardio-thoracic surgery : official journal of the European Association for Cardio-thoracic Surgery. - 1873-734X. ; 65:2
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Cardiac surgery may lead to myocardial damage and release of cardiac biomarkers through various mechanisms such as cardiac manipulation, systemic inflammation, myocardial hypoxia, cardioplegic arrest and ischaemia caused by coronary or graft occlusion. Defining perioperative myocardial infarction (PMI) after cardiac surgery presents challenges, and the association between the current PMI definitions and postoperative outcomes remains uncertain. To address these challenges, the European Association of Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS) facilitated collaboration among a multidisciplinary group to evaluate the existing evidence on the mechanisms, diagnosis and prognostic implications of PMI after cardiac surgery. The review found that the postoperative troponin value thresholds associated with an increased risk of mortality are markedly higher than those proposed by all the current definitions of PMI. Additionally, it was found that large postoperative increases in cardiac biomarkers are prognostically relevant even in absence of additional supportive signs of ischaemia. A new algorithm for PMI detection after cardiac surgery was also proposed, and a consensus was reached within the group that establishing a prognostically relevant definition of PMI is critically needed in the cardiovascular field and that PMI should be included in the primary composite outcome of coronary intervention trials.
|
|
| 6. |
- Hagström, Emil, et al.
(författare)
-
Association Between Very Low Levels of High-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol and Long-term Outcomes of Patients With Acute Coronary Syndrome Treated Without Revascularization : Insights From the TRILOGY ACS Trial
- 2016
-
Ingår i: Clinical Cardiology. - : Wiley. - 0160-9289 .- 1932-8737. ; 39:6, s. 329-337
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Low levels of high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C; < 40 mg/dL) are associated with increased risk of cardiovascular events, but it is unclear whether lower thresholds (< 30 mg/dL) are associated with increased hazard.Hypothesis: Very low levels of HDL-C may provide prognostic information in acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients treated medically without revascularization.Methods: We examined data from 9064/9326 ACS patients enrolled in the TRILOGY ACS trial. Participants were randomized to clopidogrel or prasugrel plus aspirin. Study treatments continued for 6 to 30 months. Relationships between baseline HDL-C and the composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction (MI), or stroke, and individual endpoints of death (cardiovascular and all-cause), MI, and stroke, adjusted for baseline characteristics through 30 months, were analyzed. The HDL-C was evaluated as a dichotomous variable-very low (< 30 mg/dL) vs higher (>= 30 mg/dL)-and continuously.Results: Median baseline HDL-C was 42mg/dL (interquartile range, 34-49mg/dL) with little variation over time. Frequency of the composite endpoint was similar for very low vs higher baseline HDL-C, with no risk difference between groups (hazard ratio [ HR]: 1.13, 95% confidence interval [ CI]: 0.95-1.34). Similar findings were seen for MI and stroke. However, risks for cardiovascular (HR: 1.42, 95% CI: 1.13-1.78) and all-cause death (HR: 1.36, 95% CI: 1.11-1.67) were higher in patients with very low baseline HDL-C.Conclusions: Medically managed ACS patients with very low baseline HDL-C levels have higher risk of long-term cardiovascular and all-cause death but similar risks for nonfatal ischemic outcomes vs patients with higher baseline HDL-C.
|
|
| 7. |
|
|
| 8. |
- O'Donoghue, Michelle, et al.
(författare)
-
Early invasive vs conservative treatment strategies in women and men with unstable angina and non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction : a meta-analysis
- 2008
-
Ingår i: Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA). - : American Medical Association (AMA). - 0098-7484 .- 1538-3598. ; 300:1, s. 71-80
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- CONTEXT: Although an invasive strategy is frequently used in patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes (NSTE ACS), data from some trials suggest that this strategy may not benefit women. OBJECTIVE: To conduct a meta-analysis of randomized trials to compare the effects of an invasive vs conservative strategy in women and men with NSTE ACS. DATA SOURCES: Trials were identified through a computerized literature search of the MEDLINE and Cochrane databases (1970-April 2008) using the search terms invasive strategy, conservative strategy, selective invasive strategy, acute coronary syndromes, non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction, and unstable angina. STUDY SELECTION: Randomized clinical trials comparing an invasive vs conservative treatment strategy in patients with NSTE ACS. DATA EXTRACTION: The principal investigators for each trial provided the sex-specific incidences of death, myocardial infarction (MI), and rehospitalization with ACS through 12 months of follow-up. DATA SYNTHESIS: Data were combined across 8 trials (3075 women and 7075 men). The odds ratio (OR) for the composite of death, MI, or ACS for invasive vs conservative strategy in women was 0.81 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.65-1.01; 21.1% vs 25.0%) and in men was 0.73 (95% CI, 0.55-0.98; 21.2% vs 26.3%) without significant heterogeneity between sexes (P for interaction = .26). Among biomarker-positive women, an invasive strategy was associated with a 33% lower odds of death, MI, or ACS (OR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.50-0.88) and a nonsignificant 23% lower odds of death or MI (OR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.47-1.25). In contrast, an invasive strategy was not associated with a significant reduction in the triple composite end point in biomarker-negative women (OR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.61-1.44; P for interaction = .36) and was associated with a nonsignificant 35% higher odds of death or MI (OR, 1.35; 95% CI, 0.78-2.35; P for interaction = .08). Among men, the OR for death, MI, or ACS was 0.56 (95% CI, 0.46-0.67) if biomarker-positive and 0.72 (95% CI, 0.51-1.01) if biomarker-negative (P for interaction = .09). CONCLUSIONS: In NSTE ACS, an invasive strategy has a comparable benefit in men and high-risk women for reducing the composite end point of death, MI, or rehospitalization with ACS. In contrast, our data provide evidence supporting the new guideline recommendation for a conservative strategy in low-risk women.
|
|
| 9. |
- O'Donoghue, Michelle L., et al.
(författare)
-
An Invasive or Conservative Strategy in Patients With Diabetes Mellitus and Non-ST-Segment Elevation Acute Coronary Syndromes A Collaborative Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials
- 2012
-
Ingår i: Journal of the American College of Cardiology. - : Elsevier BV. - 0735-1097 .- 1558-3597. ; 60:2, s. 106-111
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Objectives The purpose of this study was to conduct a meta-analysis to examine an invasive or conservative strategy in diabetic versus nondiabetic patients. Background Diabetic patients are at increased risk of cardiovascular events after an acute coronary syndrome, yet it remains unknown whether they derive enhanced benefit from an invasive strategy.Methods Randomized trials comparing an invasive versus conservative treatment strategy were identified. The prevalence of cardiovascular events through 12 months was reported for each trial, stratified by diabetes mellitus status and randomized treatment strategy. Relative risk (RR) ratios and absolute risk reductions were combined using random-effects models.Results Data were combined across 9 trials comprising 9,904 subjects of whom 1,789 (18.1%) had diabetes mellitus. The RRs for death, nonfatal myocardial infarction (MI), or rehospitalization with an acute coronary syndrome for an invasive versus conservative strategy were similar between diabetic patients (RR: 0.87; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.73 to 1.03) and nondiabetic patients (RR: 0.86; 95% CI: 0.70 to 1.06; p interaction = 0.83). An invasive strategy reduced nonfatal MI in diabetic patients (RR: 0.71; 95% CI: 0.55 to 0.92), but not in nondiabetic patients (RR: 0.98; 95% CI: 0.74 to 1.29; p interaction = 0.09). The absolute risk reduction in MI with an invasive strategy was greater in diabetic than nondiabetic patients (absolute risk reduction: 3.7% vs. 0.1%; p interaction = 0.02). There were no differences in death or stroke between groups (p interactions 0.68 and 0.20, respectively).Conclusions An early invasive strategy yielded similar RR reductions in overall cardiovascular events in diabetic and nondiabetic patients. However, an invasive strategy appeared to reduce recurrent nonfatal MI to a greater extent in diabetic patients. These data support the updated guidelines that recommend an invasive strategy for patients with diabetes mellitus and non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes.
|
|
| 10. |
- Reynolds, Harmony R., et al.
(författare)
-
Association of Sex With Severity of Coronary Artery Disease, Ischemia, and Symptom Burden in Patients With Moderate or Severe Ischemia Secondary Analysis of the ISCHEMIA Randomized Clinical Trial
- 2020
-
Ingår i: JAMA cardiology. - : American Medical Association (AMA). - 2380-6583 .- 2380-6591. ; 5:7, s. 773-786
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Key PointsQuestion When considering patients who have obstructive coronary artery disease and ischemia on stress testing, are there sex differences in severity of coronary artery disease, ischemia, and/or symptoms?Findings In this secondary analysis of the ISCHEMIA randomized clinical trial of 5179 patients, women had more frequent angina, less extensive coronary artery disease, and less severe ischemia than men. On multivariate analysis, female sex was independently associated with greater angina frequency.Meaning There may be inherent sex differences in the complex relationships between angina, ischemia, and atherosclerosis that may have implications for testing and treatment of patients with suspected coronary artery disease.AbstractImportance While many features of stable ischemic heart disease vary by sex, differences in ischemia, coronary anatomy, and symptoms by sex have not been investigated among patients with moderate or severe ischemia. The enrolled ISCHEMIA trial cohort that underwent coronary computed tomographic angiography (CCTA) was required to have obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD) for randomization.Objective To describe sex differences in stress testing, CCTA findings, and symptoms in ISCHEMIA trial participants.Design, Setting, and Participants This secondary analysis of the multicenter ISCHEMIA randomized clinical trial analyzed baseline characteristics of patients with stable ischemic heart disease. Individuals were enrolled from July 2012 to January 2018 based on local reading of moderate or severe ischemia on a stress test, after which blinded CCTA was performed in most. Core laboratories reviewed stress tests and CCTAs. Participants with no obstructive CAD or with left main CAD of 50% or greater were excluded. Those who met eligibility criteria including CCTA (if performed) were randomized to a routine invasive or a conservative management strategy (N = 5179). Angina was assessed using the Seattle Angina Questionnaire. Analysis began October 1, 2018.Interventions CCTA and angina assessment.Main Outcomes and Measures Sex differences in stress test, CCTA findings, and symptom severity.Results Of 8518 patients enrolled, 6256 (77%) were men. Women were more likely to have no obstructive CAD (<50% stenosis in all vessels on CCTA) (353 of 1022 [34.4%] vs 378 of 3353 [11.3%]). Of individuals who were randomized, women had more angina at baseline than men (median [interquartile range] Seattle Angina Questionnaire Angina Frequency score: 80 [70-100] vs 90 [70-100]). Women had less severe ischemia on stress imaging (383 of 919 [41.7%] vs 1361 of 2972 [45.9%] with severe ischemia; 386 of 919 [42.0%] vs 1215 of 2972 [40.9%] with moderate ischemia; and 150 of 919 [16.4%] vs 394 of 2972 [13.3%] with mild or no ischemia). Ischemia was similar by sex on exercise tolerance testing. Women had less extensive CAD on CCTA (205 of 568 women [36%] vs 1142 of 2418 men [47%] with 3-vessel disease; 184 of 568 women [32%] vs 754 of 2418 men [31%] with 2-vessel disease; and 178 of 568 women [31%] vs 519 of 2418 men [22%] with 1-vessel disease). Female sex was independently associated with greater angina frequency (odds ratio, 1.41; 95% CI, 1.13-1.76).Conclusions and Relevance Women in the ISCHEMIA trial had more frequent angina, independent of less extensive CAD, and less severe ischemia than men. These findings reflect inherent sex differences in the complex relationships between angina, atherosclerosis, and ischemia that may have implications for testing and treatment of patients with suspected stable ischemic heart disease.
|
|
| 11. |
- Reynolds, Harmony R., et al.
(författare)
-
Sex Differences in Revascularization, Treatment Goals, and Outcomes of Patients With Chronic Coronary Disease : Insights From the ISCHEMIA Trial
- 2024
-
Ingår i: Journal of the American Heart Association. - : John Wiley & Sons. - 2047-9980. ; 13:5
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BackgroundWomen with chronic coronary disease are generally older than men and have more comorbidities but less atherosclerosis. We explored sex differences in revascularization, guideline‐directed medical therapy, and outcomes among patients with chronic coronary disease with ischemia on stress testing, with and without invasive management.Methods and ResultsThe ISCHEMIA (International Study of Comparative Health Effectiveness with Medical and Invasive Approaches) trial randomized patients with moderate or severe ischemia to invasive management with angiography, revascularization, and guideline‐directed medical therapy, or initial conservative management with guideline‐directed medical therapy alone. We evaluated the primary outcome (cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or hospitalization for unstable angina, heart failure, or resuscitated cardiac arrest) and other end points, by sex, in 1168 (22.6%) women and 4011 (77.4%) men. Invasive group catheterization rates were similar, with less revascularization among women (73.4% of invasive‐assigned women revascularized versus 81.2% of invasive‐assigned men; P<0.001). Women had less coronary artery disease: multivessel in 60.0% of invasive‐assigned women and 74.8% of invasive‐assigned men, and no ≥50% stenosis in 12.3% versus 4.5% (P<0.001). In the conservative group, 4‐year catheterization rates were 26.3% of women versus 25.6% of men (P=0.72). Guideline‐directed medical therapy use was lower among women with fewer risk factor goals attained. There were no sex differences in the primary outcome (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] for women versus men, 0.93 [95% CI, 0.77–1.13]; P=0.47) or the major secondary outcome of cardiovascular death/myocardial infarction (adjusted HR, 0.93 [95% CI, 0.76–1.14]; P=0.49), with no significant sex‐by‐treatment‐group interactions.ConclusionsWomen had less extensive coronary artery disease and, therefore, lower revascularization rates in the invasive group. Despite lower risk factor goal attainment, women with chronic coronary disease experienced similar risk‐adjusted outcomes to men in the ISCHEMIA trial.
|
|
