Immediate vs delayed intervention for acute coronary syndromes: a randomized clinical trial
- PMID: 19724041
- DOI: 10.1001/jama.2009.1267
Immediate vs delayed intervention for acute coronary syndromes: a randomized clinical trial
Abstract
Context: International guidelines recommend an early invasive strategy for patients with high-risk acute coronary syndromes without ST-segment elevation, but the optimal timing of intervention is uncertain.
Objective: To determine whether immediate intervention on admission can result in a reduction of myocardial infarction compared with a delayed intervention.
Design, setting, and patients: The Angioplasty to Blunt the Rise of Troponin in Acute Coronary Syndromes Randomized for an Immediate or Delayed Intervention (ABOARD) study, a randomized clinical trial that assigned, from August 2006 through September 2008 at 13 centers in France, 352 patients with acute coronary syndromes without ST-segment elevation and a Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) score of 3 or more to receive intervention either immediately or on the next working day (between 8 and 60 hours after enrollment).
Main outcome measures: The primary end point was the peak troponin value during hospitalization; the key secondary end point was the composite of death, myocardial infarction, or urgent revascularization at 1-month follow-up.
Results: Time from randomization to sheath insertion was 70 minutes with immediate intervention vs 21 hours with delayed intervention. The primary end point did not differ between the 2 strategies (median [interquartile range] troponin I value, 2.1 [0.3-7.1] ng/mL vs 1.7 [0.3-7.2] ng/mL in the immediate and delayed intervention groups, respectively; P = .70). The key secondary end point was observed in 13.7% (95% confidence interval, 8.6%-18.8%) of the group assigned to receive immediate intervention and 10.2% (95% confidence interval, 5.7%-14.6%) of the group assigned to receive delayed intervention (P = .31). The other end points, as well as major bleeding, did not differ between the 2 strategies.
Conclusion: In patients with acute coronary syndromes without ST-segment elevation, a strategy of immediate intervention compared with a strategy of intervention deferred to the next working day (mean, 21 hours) did not result in a difference in myocardial infarction as defined by peak troponin level.
Trial registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00442949.
Comment in
-
Intervention timing and acute coronary syndromes.JAMA. 2010 Jan 13;303(2):131-2; author reply 132. doi: 10.1001/jama.2009.1968. JAMA. 2010. PMID: 20068203 No abstract available.
-
No difference in peak troponin level in immediate versus delayed (next working day) intervention for acute coronary syndrome without ST-segment elevation.Evid Based Med. 2010 Feb;15(1):26-7. doi: 10.1136/ebm.15.1.26. Evid Based Med. 2010. PMID: 20176883 No abstract available.
Similar articles
-
Abciximab in patients with acute coronary syndromes undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention after clopidogrel pretreatment: the ISAR-REACT 2 randomized trial.JAMA. 2006 Apr 5;295(13):1531-8. doi: 10.1001/jama.295.13.joc60034. Epub 2006 Mar 13. JAMA. 2006. PMID: 16533938 Clinical Trial.
-
Prognosis of patients with non-ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction and nonobstructive coronary artery disease: propensity-matched analysis from the Acute Catheterization and Urgent Intervention Triage Strategy trial.Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2014 Jun;7(3):285-93. doi: 10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.113.000606. Epub 2014 May 20. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2014. PMID: 24847016
-
Early versus delayed invasive intervention in acute coronary syndromes.N Engl J Med. 2009 May 21;360(21):2165-75. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa0807986. N Engl J Med. 2009. PMID: 19458363 Clinical Trial.
-
Timing of Coronary Invasive Strategy in Non-ST-Segment Elevation Acute Coronary Syndromes and Clinical Outcomes: An Updated Meta-Analysis.JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2016 Nov 28;9(22):2267-2276. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2016.09.017. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2016. PMID: 27884352 Review.
-
Early vs. delayed invasive strategy in patients with acute coronary syndromes without ST-segment elevation: a meta-analysis of randomized studies.QJM. 2011 Mar;104(3):193-200. doi: 10.1093/qjmed/hcq258. Epub 2011 Jan 23. QJM. 2011. PMID: 21262739 Review.
Cited by
-
Beyond STEMI-NSTEMI Paradigm: Dante Pazzanese's Proposal for Occlusion Myocardial Infarction Diagnosis.Arq Bras Cardiol. 2024 Jul 15;121(5):e20230733. doi: 10.36660/abc.20230733. eCollection 2024. Arq Bras Cardiol. 2024. PMID: 39016396 Free PMC article. Review. English, Portuguese.
-
Very early vs delayed invasive strategy in high-risk NSTEMI patients without hemodynamic instability: Insight from the KAMIR-NIH.PLoS One. 2024 Jun 6;19(6):e0304273. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0304273. eCollection 2024. PLoS One. 2024. PMID: 38843207 Free PMC article.
-
Invasive versus Conservative Management in Coronary Artery Disease.Clin Med Res. 2023 Jun;21(2):95-104. doi: 10.3121/cmr.2023.1806. Clin Med Res. 2023. PMID: 37407216 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Beyond the ST-segment in Occlusion Myocardial Infarction (OMI): Diagnosing the OMI-nous.Turk J Emerg Med. 2022 Sep 28;23(1):1-4. doi: 10.4103/2452-2473.357333. eCollection 2023 Jan-Mar. Turk J Emerg Med. 2022. PMID: 36818946 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Should we still have the COURAGE to perform elective PCI in stable myocardial ISCHEMIA?Br J Cardiol. 2020 Oct 16;27(4):33. doi: 10.5837/bjc.2020.033. eCollection 2020. Br J Cardiol. 2020. PMID: 35747225 Free PMC article. No abstract available.
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
Associated data
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
