Short and long term prognosis of acute myocardial infarction since introduction of thrombolysis.

OBJECTIVE--To record prognosis and determinants of outcome in patients with acute myocardial infarction since thrombolysis was introduced. DESIGN--Observational study. SETTING--London district general hospital. PATIENTS--608 consecutive patients admitted to the coronary care unit with acute myocardial infarction between 1 January 1988 and 31 December 1991. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE--All cause mortality, non-fatal ischaemic events (myocardial infarction, unstable angina), and revascularisation. RESULTS--Of the 608 patients, 89 (14.6%) died in hospital. 507 [corrected] patients were followed up after discharge from hospital. Mortality (95% confidence interval) at 30 days, one year, and three years was 16.0% (13.4% to 19.2%), 21.7% (18.6% to 25.2%), and 29.4% (25.3% to 33.9%) respectively. Event free survival (survival without a non-fatal ischaemic event) was 80.4% (77.0% to 83.4%) at 30 days, 66.8% (62.8% to 70.5%) at one year, and 56.1% (51.3% to 60.6%) at three years. Survival in patients treated with thrombolysis was considerably higher than in those not given thrombolysis (three year survival: 76.7% v 54.3%), although the incidence of non-fatal ischaemic events was the same in the two groups. Multivariate determinants of six month survival were left ventricular failure, treatment with thrombolysis and aspirin, smoking history, bundle branch block, and age. For patients who survived six months, age was the only factor related to long term survival. CONCLUSIONS--Although patients treated by thrombolysis had a relatively good prognosis, long term mortality and the incidence of non-fatal recurrent ischaemic events remained high. Effective strategies for the identification and treatment of high risk patients need to be reassessed.     

Collaborative overview of randomised trials of antiplatelet therapy--I: Prevention of death,myocardial infarction,and stroke by prolonged antiplatelet therapy in various categories of patients. Antiplatelet Trialists' Collaboration.

OBJECTIVE--To determine the effects of "prolonged" antiplatelet therapy (that is, given for one month or more) on "vascular events" (non-fatal myocardial infarctions, non-fatal strokes, or vascular deaths) in various categories of patients. DESIGN--Overviews of 145 randomised trials of "prolonged" antiplatelet therapy versus control and 29 randomised comparisons between such antiplatelet regimens. SETTING--Randomised trials that could have been available by March 1990. SUBJECTS--Trials of antiplatelet therapy versus control included about 70,000 "high risk" patients (that is, with some vascular disease or other condition implying an increased risk of occlusive vascular disease) and 30,000 "low risk" subjects from the general population. Direct comparisons of different antiplatelet regimens involved about 10,000 high risk patients. RESULTS--In each of four main high risk categories of patients antiplatelet therapy was definitely protective. The percentages of patients suffering a vascular event among those allocated antiplatelet therapy versus appropriately adjusted control percentages (and mean scheduled treatment durations and net absolute benefits) were: (a) among about 20,000 patients with acute myocardial infarction, 10% antiplatelet therapy v 14% control (one month benefit about 40 vascular events avoided per 1000 patients treated (2P < 0.00001)); (b) among about 20,000 patients with a past history of myocardial infarction, 13% antiplatelet therapy v 17% control (two year benefit about 40/1000 (2P < 0.00001)); (c) among about 10,000 patients with a past history of stroke or transient ischaemic attack, 18% antiplatelet therapy v 22% control (three year benefit about 40/1000 (2P < 0.00001)); (d) among about 20,000 patients with some other relevant medical history (unstable angina, stable angina, vascular surgery, angioplasty, atrial fibrillation, valvular disease, peripheral vascular disease, etc), 9% v 14% in 4000 patients with unstable angina (six month benefit about 50/1000 (2P < 0.00001)) and 6% v 8% in 16,000 other high risk patients (one year benefit about 20/1000 (2P < 0.00001)). Reductions in vascular events were about one quarter in each of these four main categories and were separately statistically significant in middle age and old age, in men and women, in hypertensive and normotensive patients, and in diabetic and nondiabetic patients. Taking all high risk patients together showed reductions of about one third in non-fatal myocardial infarction, about one third in non-fatal stroke, and about one third in vascular death (each 2P < 0.00001). There was no evidence that non-vascular deaths were increased, so in each of the four main high risk categories overall mortality was significantly reduced. The most widely tested antiplatelet regimen was "medium dose" (75-325 mg/day) aspirin. Doses throughout this range seemed similarly effective (although in an acute emergency it might be prudent to use an initial dose of 160-325 mg rather than about 75 mg). There was no appreciable evidence that either a higher aspirin dose or any other antiplatelet regimen was more effective than medium dose aspirin in preventing vascular events. The optimal duration of treatment for patients with a past history of myocardial infarction, stroke, or transient ischaemic attack could not be determined directly because most trials lasted only one, two, or three years (average about two years). Nevertheless, there was significant (2P < 0.0001) further benefit between the end of year 1 and the end of year 3, suggesting that longer treatment might well be more effective. Among low risk recipients of "primary prevention" a significant reduction of one third in non-fatal myocardial infarction was, however, accompanied by a non-significant increase in stroke. Furthermore, the absolute reduction in vascular events was much smaller than for high risk patients despite a much longer treatment period (4.4% antiplatelet therapy v 4.8% control; five year     

Diagnostic re-classification and prognostic risk stratification of patients with acute chest pain

Unstable angina and myocardial infarction are prevalent manifestations of acute coronary artery disease, combined in the term ‘acute coronary syndromes’. The introduction of sensitive markers for myocardial necrosis has led to confusion regarding the distinction between small myocardial infarctions and ‘true’ unstable angina, and the application of ever more sensitive markers has accelerated the pace at which patients with unstable angina are being re-classified to non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. But in how many patients with acute chest pain is myocardial ischaemia really the cause of their symptoms? Numerous studies have shown that most have <5 ng/l high-sensitivity cardiac troponin, and that their prognosis is excellent (event rate <0.5% per year), incompatible with ‘impending infarction’. This marginalisation of patients with unstable angina pectoris should lead to the demise of this diagnosis. Without unstable angina, the usefulness of the term acute coronary syndromes may be questioned next. It is better to abandon the term altogether and revert to the original diagnosis of thrombus-related acute coronary artery disease, myocardial infarction. A national register should be the next logical step to monitor and guide the application of effective therapeutic measures and clinical outcomes in patients with myocardial infarction.

     

Evidence-based management of coronary artery disease in the elderly--current perspectives

Cardiovascular disease accounts for significant morbidity and mortality in the elderly. The clinical trial data available to guide therapy in this growing population subset are relatively limited. This review will focus on treatment approaches and recommendations obtained from subgroup analyses of elderly patients from major clinical trials for the management of chronic stable angina, acute coronary syndromes (unstable angina and non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction), and coronary revascularization. Recent advances in the treatment of stable angina have shown that use of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and lipid-lowering therapy as adjunctive measures show benefit in the elderly by reducing the occurrence of death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, and unstable angina. However, if patients experience disabling or unstable anginal symptoms despite effective medical therapy, coronary revascularization must be considered. Several clinical trials have shown a significant reduction in major adverse cardiac events when using intravenous glycoprotein receptor antagonists periprocedurally during percutaneous revascularization approaches in elderly patients with unstable angina or non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, especially when these measures are performed as soon as possible. However, the success of myocardial revascularization by a percutaneous or surgical approach is highly dependent on the patient's associated comorbidities, especially in patients over age 80 years.     

Indications for admission to a coronary care unit in patients with unstable angina.

One hundred cases with an admission diagnosis of acute coronary insufficiency or unstable angina were reviewed to establish criteria for admission to a coronary care unit. Myocardial infarction was subsequently diagnosed in 20 of the patients. Ventricular tachycardia occurred in 16 patients and ventricular fibrillation in 1 patient. Clinical features found to predict an increased risk of myocardial infarction included chest pain for more than 30 minutes within 24 hours prior to admission, new nonspecific electrocardiographic abnormalities consistent with ischemia, and diaphoresis. All patients with ventricular tachydysrhythmias had presented with both prolonged chest pain prior to admission and new electrocardiographic changes. The sensitivity, specificity and predictive value of various clinical criteria for identifying patients likely to have a myocardial infarction were calculated, and criteria with very high (greater than 90%) sensitivity were identified. These could be used to establish which patients are at increased risk of myocardial infarction and therefore require admission to a coronary care unit.     

B-type natriuretic peptide is a long-term predictor of all-cause mortality, whereas high-sensitive C-reactive protein predicts recurrent short-term troponin T positive cardiac events in chest pain patients: a prognostic study

Background

Few studies have addressed whether the combined use of B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP) and high-sensitive C-reactive protein (hsCRP) improves risk stratification for mortality and cardiovascular events in a population with chest pain and suspected acute coronary syndromes (ACS). Therefore, we wanted to assess the incremental prognostic value of these biomarkers with respect to long-term all-cause mortality and recurrent troponin T (TnT) positive cardiac events in 871 patients admitted to the emergency department.

Methods

Blood samples were obtained immediately following admission.

Results

After a follow-up period of 24 months, 129 patients had died. The BNP levels were significantly higher among patients dying than in long-term survivors (401 (145–736) versus 75 (29–235) pq/mL [median, 25 and 75% percentiles], p = 0.000). In a multivariable Cox regression model for death within 2 years, the hazard ratio (HR) for BNP in the highest quartile (Q4) was 5.13 (95% confidence interval (CI), 1.97–13.38) compared to the lowest quartile (Q1) and was associated with all-cause mortality above and beyond age, congestive heart failure and the index diagnosis ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. HsCRP rendered no prognostic information for all-cause mortality. However, within 30 days, the adjusted HR for patients with recurrent TnT cardiac positive events hsCRP in Q4 was 14.79 (95% CI, 1.89–115.63) compared with Q1 and was associated with recurrent ischemic events above and beyond age, hypercholesterolemia and TnT values at admission.

Conclusion

BNP may act as a clinically useful biomarker when obtained at admission in an unselected patient population following hospitalization with chest pain and potential ACS, and may provide complementary prognostic information to established risk determinants at long-term follow-up. Our data do not support the hypothesis that the additional assessment of hsCRP will lead to better risk stratification for survival than BNP alone.

Trial registration

NCT00521976     

Prospective evaluation of eligibility for thrombolytic therapy in acute myocardial infarction.

OBJECTIVES--To determine the proportion of patients presenting with acute myocardial infarction who are eligible for thrombolytic therapy. DESIGN--Cohort follow up study. SETTING--The four coronary care units in Auckland, New Zealand. SUBJECTS--All 3014 patients presenting to the units with suspected myocardial infarction in 1993. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES--Eligibility for reperfusion with thrombolytic therapy (presentation within 12 hours of the onset of ischaemic chest pain with ST elevation > or = 2 mm in leads V1-V3, ST elevation > or = 1 mm in any other two contiguous leads, or new left bundle branch block); proportions of (a) patients eligible for reperfusion and (b) patients with contraindications to thrombolysis; death (including causes); definite myocardial infarction. RESULTS--948 patients had definite myocardial infarction, 124 probable myocardial infarction, and nine ST elevation but no infarction; 1274 patients had unstable angina and 659 chest pain of other causes. Of patients with definite or probable myocardial infarction, 576 (53.3%) were eligible for reperfusion, 39 had definite contraindications to thrombolysis (risk of bleeding). Hence 49.7% of patients (537/1081) were eligible for thrombolysis and 43.5% (470) received this treatment. Hospital mortality among patients eligible for reperfusion was 11.7% (55/470 cases) among those who received thrombolysis and 17.0% (18/106) among those who did not. CONCLUSIONS--On current criteria about half of patients admitted to coronary care units with definite or probable myocardial infarction are eligible for thrombolytic therapy. Few eligible patients have definite contraindications to thrombolytic therapy. Mortality for all community admissions for myocardial infarction remains high.     

Early and long-term outcome of elective stenting of the infarct-related artery in patients with viability in the infarct-area: Rationale and design of the Viability-guided Angioplasty after acute Myocardial Infarction-trial (The VIAMI-trial)

BACKGROUND: Although percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is becoming the standard therapy in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), to date most patients, even in developed countries, are reperfused with intravenous thrombolysis or do not receive a reperfusion therapy at all. In the post-lysis period these patients are at high risk for recurrent ischemic events. Early identification of these patients is mandatory as this subgroup could possibly benefit from an angioplasty of the infarct-related artery.Since viability seems to be related to ischemic adverse events, we initiated a clinical trial to investigate the benefits of PCI with stenting of the infarct-related artery in patients with viability detected early after acute myocardial infarction. METHODS: The VIAMI-study is designed as a prospective, multicenter, randomized, controlled clinical trial. Patients who are hospitalized with an acute myocardial infarction and who did not have primary or rescue PCI, undergo viability testing by low-dose dobutamine echocardiography (LDDE) within 3 days of admission. Consequently, patients with demonstrated viability are randomized to an invasive or conservative strategy. In the invasive strategy patients undergo coronary angiography with the intention to perform PCI with stenting of the infarct-related coronary artery and concomitant use of abciximab. In the conservative group an ischemia-guided approach is adopted (standard optimal care).The primary end point is the composite of death from any cause, reinfarction and unstable angina during a follow-up period of three years. CONCLUSION: The primary objective of the VIAMI-trial is to demonstrate that angioplasty of the infarct-related coronary artery with stenting and concomitant use of abciximab results in a clinically important risk reduction of future cardiac events in patients with viability in the infarct-area, detected early after myocardial infarction.     

Secondary prevention of vascular disease by prolonged antiplatelet treatment

Thirty one randomised trials of antiplatelet treatment for patients with a history of transient ischaemic attack, occlusive stroke, unstable angina, or myocardial infarction were identified. Six were still in progress, and the results of the remaining 25 were reviewed. They included a total of some 29 000 patients, 3000 of whom had died. Overall, allocation to antiplatelet treatment had no apparent effect on non-vascular mortality but reduced vascular mortality by 15% (SD 4%) and non-fatal vascular events (stroke or myocardial infarction) by 30% (4%). This suggested that with good compliance these treatments might reduce vascular mortality by about one sixth, other vascular events by about a third, and total vascular events by about a quarter. There was no significant difference between the effects of the different types of antiplatelet treatment tested (300-325 mg aspirin daily, higher aspirin doses, sulphinpyrazone, or high dose aspirin with dipyridamole), nor between the effects in patients with histories of cerebral or cardiac disease. Thus antiplatelet treatment can reduce the incidence of serious vascular events by about a quarter among a wide range of patients at particular risk of occlusive vascular disease. The balance of risk and benefit, however, might be different for “primary” prevention among people at low absolute risk of occlusive disease if antiplatelet treatment produced even a small increase in the incidence of cerebral haemorrhage.     

Value of thallium-201 imaging in detecting adverse cardiac events after myocardial infarction and thrombolysis: a follow up of 100 consecutive patients.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the prognostic role of thallium-201 imaging compared with that of exercise electrocardiography in patients with acute myocardial infarction treated by thrombolysis. DESIGN: Patients who remained free of adverse cardiac events six weeks after myocardial infarction had stress and rest 201TI imaging and exercise electrocardiography and were followed up for 8-32 months. Adverse cardiac events (death, reinfarction, unstable angina, and congestive heart failure) were documented. SETTING: Large district general hospital, Middlesex. SUBJECTS: 100 consecutive male and female patients who were stable six weeks after thrombolysis for myocardial infarction. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Prediction of occurrence of adverse cardiac events after myocardial infarction by exercise cardiography and 201TI myocardial perfusion imaging. RESULTS: Reversible ischaemia on 201TI imaging predicted adverse cardiac events in 33 out of 37 patients with such events during follow up (hazard ratio 8.1 (95% confidence interval 2.7 to 23.8), P < 0.001). Exercise electrocardiography showed reversible ischaemia in 33 patients, of whom 13 had subsequent events, and failed to predict events in 24 patients (hazard ratio 1.1 (0.56 to 2.2), P = 0.8). CONCLUSION: 201TI imaging is a sensitive predictor of subsequent adverse cardiac events in patients who have received thrombolysis after acute myocardial infarction, whereas exercise electrocardiography fails to predict outcome.     

Current management of unstable angina

The patient with unstable angina (angina of recent onset, of changing pattern or occurring at rest) is at high risk of myocardial infarction and sudden death. Patients with simple angina of recent onset can generally be managed out of hospital. Those with progressive angina or angina at rest should be admitted to a coronary care unit, kept at bed-rest, and given propranolol and long-acting nitrates when such therapy is indicated. With these approaches the rate of infarction within 1 to 3 months after the onset of unstable angina is about 12% (as compared with 40% before 1970); the mortality in the same period is less than 2% (as compared with 17% before 1970), though during the first year it is about 17%, much higher than in patients with stable angina and in survivors of acute myocardial infarction.Urgent aortocoronary bypass grafting has proven to be unnecessary and probably undesirable for most patients with unstable angina, and is now generally reserved for patients who continue to have angina in hospital while receiving full medical therapy. The ongoing management of patients whose angina is controlled during the acute phase remains controversial. The main options are to operate on every possible patient, to operate only on those with certain distributions of coronary artery lesions, and to operate only on those who have recurrent symptoms. Further studies are required to delineate the etiology and the Optimal management of unstable angina.     

Ischaemic Heart Disease: A Secondary Prevention Trial Using Clofibrate

A trial is reported of the effects of giving clofibrate to prevent progression of pre-existing ischaemic heart disease. There were two groups randomly distributed between clofibrate (350 patients) and placebo (367 patients) regimens. The trial lasted about six years and was conducted in 19 hospitals in Scotland. The criteria of acceptance into the trial were precise and were monitored by one observer. The standards of diagnosis of events were defined and all protocols and electrocardiograms were read blind by one observer.Three categories of patients were admissible to the trial: (1) patients with one myocardial infarction (W.H.O. E.C.G. criteria) between 8 and 16 weeks before the start of the trial; (2) patients with angina of a duration of 3 to 24 months, provided their E.C.G. showed signs of myocardial ischaemia at rest or after exercise; and (3) patients with one recent myocardial infarction and pre-existing angina as defined above.There were fewer deaths in patients with angina (categories 2 and 3 above) treated with clofibrate than in those on placebo. The mortality in the former group was reduced by 62%, and this is a statistically significant difference. Clofibrate did not have any statistically significant effect in reducing the rate of non-fatal infarction in patients with angina or in those with myocardial infarction and pre-existing angina, though a beneficial trend was evident when both subgroups were combined (a 44% reduction compared with the placebo group). There was a significant reduction in all events (fatal and non-fatal) in patients with angina (“all anginas”) in the clofibrate-treated group; the rate was reduced by 53%.Clofibrate did not alter the overall mortality or morbidity rates in patients admitted to the trial with recent myocardial infarction without preceding angina of more than three months'' duration. In one subgroup there was a statistically significant adverse effect in the clofibrate-treated group. The lack of any overall effect in patients with myocardial infarction might be related to the unexpectedly low mortality rate (2·97%) in the placebo group; it is usually in the region of 4-9% per annum after first myocardial infarction.In patients categorized as “all anginas” there was significant reduction in events whether the initial serum cholesterol level was high (greater than 260 mg/100 ml) or normal. Clofibrate seemed to have a small but not significant beneficial effect in patients with myocardial infarction with initially high serum cholesterol levels, but was of no value in those with initially normal serum cholesterol levels. There was no significant relationship between the response or lack of response of serum cholesterol to clofibrate and the incidence of events either in patients with angina or in those with infarction.The main conclusion of this trial is that clofibrate had a beneficial effect in reducing mortality and, to a lesser extent, morbidity in patients who presented with angina (“all anginas”). This effect was independent of initial serum cholesterol levels or the extent to which serum cholesterol was lowered. The drug had no significant overall effect on prognosis in patients with myocardial infarction alone.     

Differences in admission rates and outcomes between men and women presenting to emergency departments with coronary syndromes

Background

Previous studies examining sex-related differences in the treatment of coronary artery disease have focused on patients in hospital. We sought to examine sex-related differences at an earlier point in care — presentation to the emergency department.

Methods

We collected data on ambulatory care and hospital admissions for 54 134 patients (44% women) who presented to an emergency department in Alberta between July 1998 and March 2001 because of acute myocardial infarction, unstable angina, stable angina or chest pain. We used logistic regression and Cox regression analyses to determine sex-specific associations between the likelihood of discharge from the emergency department or coronary revascularization within 1 year and 1-year mortality after adjusting for age, comorbidities and socioeconomic factors.

Results

Following the emergency department visit, 91.3% of patients with acute myocardial infarction, 87.4% of those with unstable angina, 40.7% of those with stable angina and 19.8% of those with chest pain were admitted to hospital. Women were more likely than men to be discharged from the emergency department: adjusted odds ratio (and 95% confidence interval [CI]) 2.25 (1.75–2.90) for acute myocardial infarction, 1.71 (1.45–2.01) for unstable angina, 1.33 (1.15–1.53) for stable angina and 1.46 (1.36–1.57) for chest pain. Women were less likely than men to undergo coronary revascularization within 1 year: adjusted odds ratio (and 95% CI) 0.65 (0.57–0.73) for myocardial infarction, 0.39 (0.35–0.44) for unstable angina, 0.35 (0.29–0.42) for stable angina and 0.32 (0.27–0.37) for chest pain. Female sex had no impact on 1-year mortality among patients with acute myocardial infarction; it was associated with a decreased 1-year mortality among patients with unstable angina, stable angina and chest pain: adjusted hazard ratio (and 95% CI) 0.60 (0.46–0.78), 0.60 (0.46–0.78) and 0.74 (0.63–0.87) respectively.

Interpretation

Women presenting to the emergency department with coronary syndromes are less likely than men to be admitted to an acute care hospital and to receive coronary revascularization procedures. These differences do not translate into worse outcomes for women in terms of 1-year mortality.For patients experiencing a new-onset acute cardiac event, the emergency department is usually the point of first contact with the health care system. A fraction of patients presenting to the emergency department are admitted to an acute care hospital for treatment or continued observation. Given that decisions made in the emergency department govern not only immediate but also longer-term treatment and outcomes, it is imperative that these decisions be appropriate.The issue of gender bias in the treatment and outcomes of coronary artery disease has been examined extensively. The current guidelines of the American College of Cardiology and American Heart Association state that the treatment of acute coronary syndromes in women should be no different from that in men.^1,2 However, several studies have found evidence to the contrary. There is general consensus that the frequency of cardiac catheterization is lower among women and that they undergo fewer revascularization procedures.^3–11 Whether these lower rates are due to an inherent gender bias or indicate appropriate care continues to be debated.Most studies of gender bias in cardiovascular care have focused either on patients in an acute care facility or on selected patient populations, such as those who have undergone cardiac catheterization. The few studies that have examined sex-specific differences in treatment decisions earlier in the process of care (i.e., in the emergency department) have either been single-centre studies¹² or have involved clinical trial patients.¹³ Moreover, examination of sex-specific differences in cardiac care has traditionally been limited to more acute conditions, such as acute myocardial infarction and unstable angina.^{5,10,11,14–21} There is a need to expand our evaluation to a wider spectrum of coronary syndromes. We undertook the current study (a) to examine differences in rates of admission to acute care hospitals between men and women presenting to the emergency department with a main ambulatory care diagnosis of acute myocardial infarction, unstable angina, stable angina or chest pain and (b) to determine whether a patient''s sex is an independent predictor of 1-year treatment and outcomes in this cohort of patients.     

Collaborative meta-analysis of randomised trials of antiplatelet therapy for prevention of death, myocardial infarction, and stroke in high risk patients

ObjectiveTo determine the effects of antiplatelet therapy among patients at high risk of occlusive vascular events.DesignCollaborative meta-analyses (systematic overviews).ResultsOverall, among these high risk patients, allocation to antiplatelet therapy reduced the combined outcome of any serious vascular event by about one quarter; non-fatal myocardial infarction was reduced by one third, non-fatal stroke by one quarter, and vascular mortality by one sixth (with no apparent adverse effect on other deaths). Absolute reductions in the risk of having a serious vascular event were 36 (SE 5) per 1000 treated for two years among patients with previous myocardial infarction; 38 (5) per 1000 patients treated for one month among patients with acute myocardial infarction; 36 (6) per 1000 treated for two years among those with previous stroke or transient ischaemic attack; 9 (3) per 1000 treated for three weeks among those with acute stroke; and 22 (3) per 1000 treated for two years among other high risk patients (with separately significant results for those with stable angina (P=0.0005), peripheral arterial disease (P=0.004), and atrial fibrillation (P=0.01)). In each of these high risk categories, the absolute benefits substantially outweighed the absolute risks of major extracranial bleeding. Aspirin was the most widely studied antiplatelet drug, with doses of 75-150 mg daily at least as effective as higher daily doses. The effects of doses lower than 75 mg daily were less certain. Clopidogrel reduced serious vascular events by 10% (4%) compared with aspirin, which was similar to the 12% (7%) reduction observed with its analogue ticlopidine. Addition of dipyridamole to aspirin produced no significant further reduction in vascular events compared with aspirin alone. Among patients at high risk of immediate coronary occlusion, short term addition of an intravenous glycoprotein IIb/IIIa antagonist to aspirin prevented a further 20 (4) vascular events per 1000 (P<0.0001) but caused 23 major (but rarely fatal) extracranial bleeds per 1000.ConclusionsAspirin (or another oral antiplatelet drug) is protective in most types of patient at increased risk of occlusive vascular events, including those with an acute myocardial infarction or ischaemic stroke, unstable or stable angina, previous myocardial infarction, stroke or cerebral ischaemia, peripheral arterial disease, or atrial fibrillation. Low dose aspirin (75-150 mg daily) is an effective antiplatelet regimen for long term use, but in acute settings an initial loading dose of at least 150 mg aspirin may be required. Adding a second antiplatelet drug to aspirin may produce additional benefits in some clinical circumstances, but more research into this strategy is needed.

What is already known on this topic

Antiplatelet therapy is effective for short term treatment of patients with suspected acute myocardial infarction and unstable anginaLong term treatment is beneficial for patients who have had a myocardial infarction, stroke, or transient ischaemic attackDaily aspirin doses of 75-325 mg are effective

What this study adds

Antiplatelet therapy protects against vascular events among patients with stable angina, intermittent claudication, and (if oral anticoagulants are unsuitable) atrial fibrillationAntiplatelet therapy can be started promptly during acute presumed ischaemic stroke and continued long termDaily aspirin doses of 75-150 mg seem to be as effective as higher doses for long term treatments (and clopidrogel is an appropriate alternative for patients with a contraindication to aspirin)Short term addition of a glycoprotein IIb/IIIa antagonist to aspirin prevents vascular events in patients having percutaneous coronary intervention and those with unstable angina but causes increased bleeding     

Independent prognostic value of coronary artery calcium score and coronary computed tomography angiography in an outpatient cohort of low to intermediate risk chest pain patients

Background

Limited studies report on the additional prognostic value of coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) and the coronary artery calcium score (CACS).

Methods

For a median of 637 days, 1551 outpatients with chest pain, without known coronary artery disease (CAD) and low or intermediate pre-test probability of CAD, were followed for major adverse cardiac events (MACE), defined as death, myocardial infarction or late revascularisation. Cox proportional hazard regression was used to evaluate the independent prognostic value of CCTA and CACS.

Results

MACE occurred in 23 patients (1.5?%): death (3, 0.2?%), myocardial infarction (4, 0.3?%) and late revascularisation (16, 1.3?%). Multivariate analysis showed an independent prognostic value of CCTA (p?<?0.001), CACS of 100–400 (p?=?0.035) and CACS of >?400 (p?=?0.021). CCTA showed obstructive CAD in 3.1?% of patients with CACS?=?0. No events occurred in patients with CACS?=?0 without obstructive CAD at CCTA, whereas 2/23 patients (9?%) with CACS?=?0 with obstructive CAD had a MACE.

Conclusions

Our study shows that both CCTA and higher CACS categories have independent prognostic value in chest pain patients with low to intermediate pre-test probability of obstructive CAD, in which CCTA is appropriate. Furthermore a non-negligible amount of patients with CACS?=?0 have obstructive CAD at CCTA. CCTA can be used in these patients to identify those at risk for MACE.

     

Implications of troponin testing in clinical medicine

During the past decade considerable research has been conducted into the use of cardiac troponins, their diagnostic capability and their potential to allow risk stratification in patients with acute chest pain. Determination of risk in patients with suspected myocardial ischaemia is known to be as important as retrospective confirmation of a diagnosis of myocardial infarction (MI). Therefore, creatine kinase (CK)-MB - the former 'gold standard' in detecting myocardial necrosis - has been supplanted by new, more accurate biomarkers.Measurement of cardiac troponin levels constitute a substantial determinant in assessment of ischaemic heart disease, the presentations of which range from silent ischaemia to acute MI. Under these conditions, troponin release is regarded as surrogate marker of thrombus formation and peripheral embolization, and therefore new therapeutic strategies are focusing on potent antithrombotic regimens to improve long-term outcomes. Although elevated troponin levels are highly sensitive and specific indicators of myocardial damage, they are not always reflective of acute ischaemic coronary artery disease; other processes have been identified that cause elevations in these biomarkers. However, because prognosis appears to be related to the presence of troponins regardless of the mechanism of myocardial damage, clinicians increasingly rely on troponin assays when formulating individual therapeutic plans.     

低风险胸痛急性冠状动脉综合征患者心电图特征及其对诊断的价值研究

摘要 目的：分析低风险胸痛急性冠状动脉综合征(acute coronary syndrome,ACS)患者心电图特征及其对诊断的价值。方法：选择我院自2017年1月至2019年8月接诊的194例疑似低风险胸痛ACS患者,均采取心电图检查和冠状动脉造影检查;分析低风险胸痛ACS患者的心电图特征,观察心电图结果与冠状动脉病变支数、狭窄程度的关系,计算心电图诊断低风险胸痛ACS的特异性、敏感性等效能指标,使用受试者工作特征(receiver operating characteristic,ROC)曲线下面积(curve,AUC)定量分析ST段偏移值预测主要不良心血管事件的效能。结果：在194例疑似低风险胸痛ACS患者中,低风险胸痛ACS患者134例,低风险不稳定型心绞痛(UA)患者心电图表现以ST-T缺血性改变为主,发作时改变明显或呈现伪性改善;低风险非ST段抬高的心肌梗死(non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction,NSTEMI)患者心电图表现为肢体和胸导联ST段压低,T波低平、倒置,ST-T改变持续存在和呈动态衍变;低风险胸痛ACS患者心电图结果与冠状动脉病变支数无关(P＞0.05),与狭窄程度有关(P＜0.05);心电图诊断低风险胸痛ACS的特异性为71.67 %,敏感性为69.40 %,阳性预测值为84.55 %,阴性预测值为51.19 %,符合率为70.62 %;所有患者均获得随访,经ROC曲线分析,ST段偏移值预测低风险胸痛ACS患者发生主要不良心血管事件的最佳截值为1.85 mm,AUC为0.695,对比全球急性冠状动脉事件注册(GRACE)风险评分的0.675,差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05)。结论：低风险胸痛ACS患者心电图具有多样化,与冠状动脉狭窄程度有关,有助于初步诊断和风险评估,且ST段偏移值预测主要不良心血管事件的效能较好,值得进一步研究应用。     

Diagnostic and prognostic utility of early measurement with high-sensitivity troponin T assay in patients presenting with chest pain

Background:

High-sensitivity troponin assays are now available for clinical use. We investigated whether early measurement with such an assay is superior to a conventional assay in the evaluation of acute coronary syndromes.

Methods:

Patients presenting to an emergency department with chest pain who did not have ST-segment elevation were prospectively recruited from November 2007 to December 2010. Patients underwent serial testing with a conventional cardiac troponin I assay. Samples were also obtained at presentation and two hours later for measurement of troponin T levels using a high-sensitivity assay. The primary outcome was diagnosis of myocardial infarction on admission; secondary outcomes were death, myocardial infarction and heart failure at one year.

Results:

Of the 939 patients enrolled in the study, 205 (21.8%) had myocardial infarction. By two hours after presentation, the high-sensitivity troponin T assay at the cut-off point of the 99th percentile of the general population (14 ng/L) had a sensitivity of 92.2% (95% confidence interval [CI] 88.1%–95.0%) and a specificity of 79.7% (95% CI 78.6%–80.5%) for the diagnosis of non–ST-segment myocardial infarction. The sensitivity of the assay at presentation was 100% among patients who presented four to six hours after symptom onset. By one year, the high-sensitivity troponin T assay was found to be superior than the conventional assay in predicting death (hazard ratio [HR] 5.4, 95% CI 2.7–10.7) and heart failure (HR 27.8, 95% CI 6.6–116.4), whereas the conventional assay was superior in predicting nonfatal myocardial infarction (HR 4.0, 95% CI 2.4–6.7).

Interpretation:

The high-sensitivity troponin T assay at the cut-off point of the 99th percentile was highly sensitive for the diagnosis of myocardial infarction by two hours after presentation and had prognostic utility beyond that of the conventional assay. To rule out myocardial infarction, the optimal time to test a second sample using the high-sensitivity troponin T level may be four to six hours after symptom onset, but this finding needs verification in future studies before it can become routine practice.For novel cardiac markers to be clinically useful in diagnosing acute coronary syndromes, they need to show their incremental utility beyond that of existing markers, with therapeutic implications designed to improve patient care. Recent improvement in the performance of troponin assays to comply with current guidelines for the diagnosis of acute myocardial infarction¹ has resulted in a new generation of assays with enhanced clinical sensitivity that are now available for use in clinical care. Assays with high sensitivity have been shown to detect myocardial injury earlier^2–8 and identify more patients at risk of future adverse outcomes^8–10 than conventional assays.We conducted a study to assess whether early measurement (at presentation and two hours later) with a high-sensitivity troponin T assay could (a) effectively rule out myocardial infarction without the need for later measurement of troponin levels and (b) identify more patients at risk of adverse cardiac events within one year follow-up compared with a conventional troponin assay.     

How long should patients with suspected myocardial infarction be under observation in hospital?

Out of 368 patients admitted to hospital for chest pain and suspected acute myocardial infarction, 267 were discharged within 24 hours on the basis of the clinical picture, electrocardiogram, and serum activities of aspartate transaminase, alpha-hydroxybutyrate dehydrogenase, and creatine phosphokinase. The patients were followed up for 28 days, during which 17 were readmitted, two of them twice and one three times. Two of the patients were readmitted with non-fatal acute myocardial infarction, and two died. The patients had been primarily divided into two groups: those admitted with presumably non-coronary chest pain (77 patients) formed group 1 and those with obvious coronary chest pain (190 patients) group 2. Both deaths occurred in patients in group 2 but the incidences of events during the follow-up period were otherwise similar in the two groups, and some patients in both groups may have had small acute myocardial infarctions when first admitted. The decision to keep in hospital or discharge a patient with chest pain of recent onset can be made within 24 hours of admission. To discharge the patient acute myocardial infarction need not necessarily be excluded and conventional tests are enough to enable a decision to be made.     

Reduced risk of death at 28 days in patients taking a beta blocker before admission to hospital with myocardial infarction.

OBJECTIVE--To see whether patients taking an oral beta blocker at the time of admission to hospital with myocardial infarction have a reduced risk of death at 28 days. DESIGN--Retrospective analysis of data collected on patients admitted over four years. SETTING--Community based study. PATIENTS--2430 Consecutive patients living in the Perth statistical division admitted to hospital with myocardial infarction during 1984-7. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE--Survival at 28 days among patients taking a beta blocker at onset of myocardial infarction. RESULTS--Patients were grouped into those who were and were not taking a beta blocker at the time of admission. Though patients taking a beta blocker were older and more likely to have a history of myocardial infarction, angina, or hypertension, the overall mortality at 28 days was similar in the two groups. A logistic regression model used to adjust for factors predictive of cardiac death at 28 days confirmed that patients taking a beta blocker at the time of admission had a significantly reduced risk of death (relative risk 0.50; 95% confidence interval 0.34 to 0.76). Though the incidence of fatal ventricular fibrillation was similar in the two groups, mean peak creatine kinase activity was significantly lower in the beta blocker group. CONCLUSIONS--These data support the value of long term use of beta blockers in patients at risk of myocardial infarction. They suggest that patients taking these agents before admission to hospital with myocardial infarction have a significant survival advantage at 28 days, which may be due to a reduction in infarct size.