Timing of angiography for high- risk ACS

Similar documents
A Multicenter Randomized Trial of Immediate Versus Delayed Invasive Strategy in Patients with Non-ST Elevation ACS

(ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT ) Title: The Italian Elderly ACS Study Author: Stefano Savonitto. Date: 29 August 2011 Meeting: ESC congress, Paris

ACUTE CORONARY SYNDROME PCI IN THE ELDERLY

Treatment strategies and risk stratification in acute coronary syndromes Damman, P.

What oral antiplatelet therapy would you choose? a) ASA alone b) ASA + Clopidogrel c) ASA + Prasugrel d) ASA + Ticagrelor

NSTE ACS. Timing of intervention

Overcoming the Risk-Treatment Paradox in Non-STE ACS: It s Time! Christopher Granger, MD

High-sensitive troponin. Introduction. Platelet aggregation inhibition at admission

Evaluating Clinical Risk and Guiding management with SPECT Imaging

Andreas Baumbach Bristol Heart Institute Bristol Royal Infirmary. London 27/1/2005

NSTEACS Case Presentation

P2Y 12 blockade. To load or not to load before the cath lab?

Treatment strategies and risk stratification in acute coronary syndromes Damman, P.

Risk Stratification of ACS Patients. Frans Van de Werf, MD, PhD University of Leuven, Belgium

Original Article Impact of timing to coronary angiography in acute coronary syndrome on contemporary clinical practice

Adults With Diagnosed Diabetes

The Clopidogrel in Unstable angina to prevent Recurrent ischemic Events (CURE) Trial

INNOVATIONS 2017: Acute Coronary Syndrome Antiplatelet Therapies in Medical and Invasive Strategies.

10 Steps to Managing Non-ST Elevation ACS

Clinical Case. Management of ACS Based on ACC/AHA & ESC Guidelines. Clinical Case 4/22/12. UA/NSTEMI: Definition

Update on Antithrombotic Therapy in Acute Coronary Syndrome

Patient characteristics Intervention Comparison Length of followup

ACS: What happens after the acute phase? Frans Van de Werf, MD, PhD Leuven, Belgium

Timing of intervention in high-risk non-st-elevation acute coronary syndromes in PCI versus non-pci centres

Case study #1 Evolving Concepts in Non-ST Elevation ACS (NSTE-ACS)

DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST

Culprit PCI vs MultiVessel PCI for Acute Myocardial Infarction

High Sensitivity Troponin Improves Management. But Not Yet

Prasugrel vs. Ticagrelor in ACS/PCI Which one to choose? V. Voudris MD FESC FACC 2 nd Cardiology Division Onassis Cardiac Surgery Center

Pathophysiology of ACS

Acute Coronary Syndrome. Cindy Baker, MD FACC Director Peripheral Vascular Interventions Division of Cardiovascular Medicine

Treatment strategies and risk stratification in non ST elevation acute coronary syndromes Windhausen, A.

Clinical Seminar. Which Diabetic Patient is a Candidate for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention - European Perspective

An update on the management of UA / NSTEMI. Michael H. Crawford, MD

Acute Coronary Syndrome. ACC/AHA 2002 Guidelines

Citation for published version (APA): Mahmoud, K. (2014). Symptom onset and treatment in acute myocardial infarction. [S.l.]: [S.n.].

Disclosures. Dr. Scirica has also served as a consultant for Lexicon, Arena, Gilead, and Eisai.

Characterization of Types and Sizes of Myocardial Infarction Reduced with Evolocumab in FOURIER

Post-Procedural Myocardial Injury or Infarction

Benefit of Performing PCI Based on FFR

Chest Pain: To Cath or Not? Part I

Cardiogenic Shock. Carlos Cafri,, MD

Recognizing the High Risk NSTEMI Patient for Early Appropriate Therapy

REVISED MI DEFINITIONS IMPLICATIONS FOR CLINICAL TRIALS. Maarten L Simoons Thoraxcenter - Erasmus MC Rotterdam - The Netherlands

Effect of upstream clopidogrel treatment in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction undergoing primary PCI

Columbia University Medical Center Cardiovascular Research Foundation

Why and How Should We Switch Clopidogrel to Prasugrel?

Belinda Green, Cardiologist, SDHB, 2016

Cindy L. Grines MD FACC FSCAI

Disclosures. Inpatient Management of Non-ST Elevation Acute Coronary Syndromes. Edward McNulty MD, FACC. None

Management of ST-elevation myocardial infarction Update 2009 Late comers: which options?

Direct Thrombin Inhibitors for PCI Pharmacology: Role of Bivalirudin in High-Risk PCI

Use of Invasive Strategy in Non ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction Is a Major Determinant of Improved Long-Term Survival

Recommendations for criteria for STEMI systems of care: A focus on pharmacoinvasive strategies

Ticagrelor compared with clopidogrel in patients with acute coronary syndromes the PLATO trial

Approach to Multi Vessel disease with STEMI

Benefit of Early Invasive Therapy in Acute Coronary Syndromes A Meta-Analysis of Contemporary Randomized Clinical Trials

Journal of the American College of Cardiology Vol. 40, No. 6, by the American College of Cardiology Foundation ISSN /02/$22.

Case Challenges in ACS The Very Elderly in the Cath Lab

Tim Henry, MD Director, Division of Cardiology Professor, Department of Medicine Cedars-Sinai Heart Institute

We are IntechOpen, the world s leading publisher of Open Access books Built by scientists, for scientists. International authors and editors

Acute Coronary Syndromes: Different Continents, Different Guidelines?

Upstream P2Y 12 RB. Stefano Savonitto Divisione di Cardiologia Arcispedale S. Maria Nuova Reggio Emilia

STEMI update. Vijay Krishnamoorthy M.D. Interventional Cardiology

FFR-guided Complete vs. Culprit Only Revascularization in AMI Patients Ki Hong Choi, MD On Behalf of FRAME-AMI Investigators

DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST. Lecture fees: AstraZeneca, Ely Lilly, Merck.

The top 5 trials in the last year: Ischemic Heart Disease

Non ST Elevation-ACS. Michael W. Cammarata, MD

Timing of Anti-Platelet Therapy for ACS (EARLY-ACS & ACUITY) Mitchell W. Krucoff, MD, FACC

Acute Coronary Syndromes

How to approach non-infarct related artery disease in patients with STEMI in a limited resource setting

UPDATE ACUTE CORONARY SYNDROMES. Dr. Wayne Tymchak April 7, 2017

Periprocedural Myocardial Infarction and Clinical Outcome In Bifurcation Lesion

Current Advances and Best Practices in Acute STEMI Management A pharmacoinvasive approach

DIFFERENTIATING THE PATIENT WITH UNDIFFERENTIATED CHEST PAIN

ΠΑΝΕΠΙΣΤΗΜΙΟ ΙΩΑΝΝΙΝΩΝ

Management of stable CAD FFR guided therapy: the new gold standard

Myocardial Infarction In Dr.Yahya Kiwan

Fractional Flow Reserve: Review of the latest data

Oral anticoagulation/antiplatelet therapy in the secondary prevention of ACS patients the cost of reducing death!

Acute Coronary Syndromes: Selective vs Early Invasive Strategies

egfr > 50 (n = 13,916)

Acute Coronary Syndrome. Sonny Achtchi, DO

Conference Paper Antithrombotic Therapy in Patients with Acute Coronary Syndromes: Biological Markers and Personalized Medicine

Stephan Windecker Department of Cardiology Swiss Cardiovascular Center and Clinical Trials Unit Bern Bern University Hospital, Switzerland

Two-Year Follow-Up of Tirofiban-Based Management of Non-ST-Elevation Acute Coronary Syndrome A Single Center Study

Timing of Intervention in Non ST Elevation Acute Coronary Syndromes: And the VERDICT is? Sanjit S. Jolly, M.D., M.Sc., Shamir R. Mehta, M.D., M.Sc.

FFR in Multivessel Disease

New Generation Drug- Eluting Stent in Korea

Nuevos antiagregantes plaquetarios

The Clinical Unmet need in the patient with Diabetes and ACS

INTRODUCTION. Key Words:

Master Class in Preventive Cardiology Focus on Diabetes and Cardiovascular Disease Geneva April

Clopidogrel When For What For How Long. T Benjanuwattra Chiang Mai Heart Cent

Troponin I elevation increases the risk of death and stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation a RE-LY substudy. Ziad Hijazi, MD

Platelet function testing to guide P2Y 12 -inhibitor treatment in ACS patients after PCI: insights from a national program in Hungary

TIMI, PURSUIT, and GRACE risk scores: sustained prognostic value and interaction with revascularization in NSTE-ACS

Management of cardiovascular disease - coronary interventions -

Medical Management of Acute Coronary Syndrome: The roles of a noncardiologist. Norbert Lingling D. Uy, MD Professor of Medicine UERMMMCI

Ischemic and bleeding risk stratification in NSTE ACS. Andrzej Budaj Postgraduate Medical School Grochowski Hospital, Warsaw, Poland

Transcription:

Timing of angiography for high- risk ACS Christian Spaulding, MD, PhD, FESC, FACC Cardiology Department Cochin Hospital, Inserm U 970 Paris Descartes University Paris, France

A very old story. The Interventional Cardiologist The Intellectual Non Interventional Cardiologist

Two questions in one. Routine invasive strategy: should we perform an angiogram in all patients with «high risk» ACS or should they be treated medically and tested for ischemia? FIR metaanalysis Timing of angiogram: immediately, or in the first 24-48 hours? TIMACS ABOARD

n = 1810 RITA-3: 5-year 5 mortality OR 0.76 (95%CI: 0.58-1.00, p=0.054) Selective invasive Routine invasive n = 2457 FRISC II: 5-year 5 mortality RR 0.95 (95%CI: 0.75-1.21, p=0.693) Selective invasive ICTUS: 5-year 5 mortality HR 1.13 (95%CI: 0.80-1.60, p=0.52) n = 1190 Routine invasive Routine invasive Selective invasive

Long-Term Outcome of a Routine versus Selective Invasive Strategy in Patients with non-st elevation ACS Keith AA Fox, Tim C Clayton, Peter Damman, Stuart J Pocock, Robbert J de Winter, Jan GP Tijssen, Bo Lagerqvist,, Lars Wallentin FIR collaboration: FRISC ICTUS RITA

Procedures 5467 patients with nste-acs included Routine invasive strategy Early angiography with subsequent PCI or CABG Selective invasive strategy Angiography only if refractory angina or rest ischemia occurs despite optimal medical therapy

Primary outcomes at 5 years Combined dataset Hazard ratio p-value Selective invasive n = 2746 Routine invasive n = 2721 (95% CI) MI 338 12.9% 260 10.0% 0.77 (0.65-0.90) 0.001 CV death 218 8.1% 181 6.8% 0.83 (0.68-1.01) 0.068 CV death/mi 475 17.9% 389 14.7% 0.81 (0.71-0.93) 0.002

Outcomes at 5 years Combined dataset Hazard ratio p- value Selective invasive Routine invasive (95% CI) All-cause death All-cause death/mi 321 11.7% 560 20.9% 288 10.6% 480 18.1% 0.90 (0.77-1.05) 0.85 (0.75-0.96) 0.19 0.008

Cumulative risk of CV death or MI by risk group High Intermediate Low

Summary The routine invasive strategy reduces cardiovascular death or MI at long-term follow-up 3.2% absolute risk reduction in CV death/mi 19% relative risk reduction Risk stratification identifies the patient group with the greatest absolute benefits 11.1% absolute risk reduction in highest risk patients The absolute risk reductions in CV death/mi in low (2.0%) and Intermediate groups (3.8%) exceed those seen in many trials of pharmacological agents

Two questions in one. Routine invasive strategy: should we perform an angiogram in patients with ACS or should they be treated medically and tested for ischemia? ROUTINE INVASIVE STRATEGY Timing of angiogram: immediately, or in the first 24-48 hours? TIMACS ABOARD

In patients with acute coronary syndromes, early invasive intervention (coronary angiography at a median of 14 hours) was compared with delayed intervention (angiography at a median of 50 hours) Primary outcome: composite of death, myocardial infarction, or stroke at 6 months Secondary outcome: death, MI, stroke or refractory angina at 6 months

Primary end-point Secondary end-points Mehta SR et al. N Engl J Med 2009;360:2165-2175

Kaplan-Meier Cumulative Risk of the Primary Outcome, Stratified According to GRACE Risk Score at Baseline Mehta SR et al. N Engl J Med 2009;360:2165-2175

Conclusion Early intervention did not differ greatly from delayed intervention in preventing the primary outcome, but it did reduce the rate of the composite secondary outcome of death, myocardial infarction, or refractory ischemia and was superior to delayed intervention in high-risk patients

Preliminary Results

ABOARD study design NSTE-ACS (352 pts) 2 of 3 Criteria: Ischemic symptom, ST-T T change, troponin rise with TIMI score > 3 IVRS RANDOMIZATION Immediate cath Next day cath All PCIs on abciximab 1-month Follow-up Preliminary Results

Primary EP (peak of troponin I) 0.00 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.10 0.12 0.14 Peak values of troponin I in the 2 groups Distribution curves of the peaks values of troponin in the immediate and delayed groups immediate group delayed group Median, IQR 2.1 (0.3-7.1) 1.7 (0.3-7.2) p = 0.70 0 20 40 60 80 100 Troponin I (ng/ml) Preliminary Results

Composite Ischemic Endpoints at 1 month % 25 20 Immediate Delayed P=0.94 15 P=0.31 10 5 0 Death / MI / UR Key secondary EP Death / MI / UR / RI Preliminary Results

Individual Ischemic Endpoints at 1 month % 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Immediate Delayed P=0.28 P=0.09 P=0.32 P=0.57 P=0.62 P=0.08 Death MI Urg Revasc Urg PCI Urg CABG Rec Isch Preliminary Results

Coronary angiogram in ACS: a personal view Routine invasive strategy: should we perform an angiogram in patients with ACS or should they be treated medically and tested for ischemia? ROUTINE INVASIVE STRATEGY Timing of angiogram: immediately, or in the first 24-48 hours? Immediately in high-risk patients ST segment changes despite medical therapy Heart failure or cardiogenic shock VT, VF Diabetes, prior CABG or PCI (+/-) 24-48 hours after admission in others

One size doesn t fill all!!! Use your clinical judgment

Invasive vs. conservative Trials in ACS: How to Compare the Results? The greater the difference in the rate of revascularization, the greater the benefit on mortality Relative Mortality Benefit: Invasive Vs. Conservative Strategies (%) 60 50 40 30 20 10 0-10 -20-30 -40 TIMI IIIB VANQUISH TACTICS -TIMI18 ICTUS RITA 3 FRISC II GUSTO IV-ACS Databank Analysis 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Difference in rate of revascularization: invasive-conservative strategies (%) Adapted from Bassand JP et al. Eur Heart J 2007;28:1598-1660

Cumulative percentage Timing of first coronary revascularization 100 80 60 40 20 Revasc at 1yr % Selective invasive Routine invasive 64.1% 71.8% 73.3% 17.6% 41.6% 47.8% Routine invasive Selective invasive ICTUS 0 79 54 0 1 2 3 4 5 FRISC II 78 44 Follow-up time (years) RITA-3 57 28

Differences Among ACS trials Revascularization rates: In ICTUS, revascularization rates were high in the early invasive and the selectively-invasive groups - during the initial hospitalization: 76% and 40% - within 1 year after randomization: 79% and 54% as compared with those in -TIMI-IIIb (64% vs. 58% at 1 year), -VANQWISH (44% vs. 33% at 23 months), -FRISC II (71% vs. 9% at 10 days, and 77% vs. 37% at 6 months), -TACTICS TIMI 18 (61% vs. 44% at 6 months), and -RITA-3 (44% vs. 10% during the index admission, and 57% vs. 28% within 1 year) de Winter RJ et al. N Engl J Med 2005;353:1095-1104

Differences Among ACS trials Biomarkers As in the VANQWISH trial, all patients in ICTUS had evidence of myocardial necrosis, as compared with 58% with an elevated troponin level in FRISC II, 54% in TACTICS TIMI 18, and 75% in RITA- 3. The fact that all patients in ICTUS were at high risk (as evidenced by an elevated troponin level) may explain the earlier and more frequent revascularization in the group assigned to a selectively invasive strategy. The 40% rate of revascularization in the selectively invasive group from ICTUS is comparable to the 48% observed in patients with ACS from the GRACE registry. de Winter RJ et al. N Engl J Med 2005;353:1095-1104