Key result
Invasive management of NSTEMI in 2010 compared with 2007 was associated with significantly lower rates of in-hospital major bleeding (6.6% vs 8.7%, P<0.01).
Why the study?
How did the utilization of anti-thrombotic agents and in-hospital outcomes change between 2007 and 2010 in NSTEMI patients managed invasively?
Observational (n=64,199)
Yes
How did the utilization of anti-thrombotic agents and in-hospital outcomes change between 2007 and 2010 in NSTEMI patients managed invasively?
From 2007 to 2010, shifts in antithrombotic strategies and reduced excess dosing in invasively managed NSTEMI patients were associated with significant reductions in in-hospital major bleeding and transfusions.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
May support safer antithrombotic strategies in invasive NSTEMI; leaves open need for prospective confirmation.
OBJECTIVE: To analyze trends in utilization of anti-thrombotic agents (ATA) and in-hospital clinical outcomes in non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) patients managed with an invasive strategy from 2007 to 2010. METHODS & RESULTS: Using ACTION Registry(®)-GWTG™ data, we analyzed trends in use of ATA and in-hospital clinical outcomes among 64,199 NSTEMI patients managed invasively between 2007 and 2010. ATA included unfractionated heparin (UFH), low molecular weight heparin (LMWH), glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors (GPI) and bivalirudin. Although the proportion of NSTEMI patients treated with PCI within 48h of hospital arrival was similar in 2007 and 2010, percentage use of bivalirudin (13.4-27.3%; p<0.01) and UFH increased (60.0-67.5%, p<0.01), and that of GPI (62.3-41.0%; p<0.01) and LMWH (41.5-36.8%; p<0.01) declined. Excess dosing of UFH (75.9-59.3%, p<0.01), LMWH (9.6-5.2%; p<0.01) and GPI (8.9-5.9%, p<0.01) was also significantly lower in 2010 compared with 2007. Though in-hospital mortality rates were similar in 2007 and 2010 (2.3-1.9%, p=0.08), the rates of in-hospital major bleeding (8.7-6.6%, p<0.01) and non-CABG related RBC transfusion (6.3-4.6%, p<0.01) were significantly lower in 2010 compared with 2007. CONCLUSION: Compared with 2007, patients with NSTEMI, who were managed invasively in 2010 received GPI and LMWH less often and bivalirudin and UFH more frequently. There were sizeable reductions in the rates of excess dosing of UFH (though still occurred in 67% of patients), GPI and LMWH. In-hospital major bleeding complications and post-procedural RBC transfusion were lower in 2010 compared with 2007.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Wayangankar et al. (2016) conducted an observational in non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) (n=64,199). Invasive management in 2010 vs. Invasive management in 2007 was evaluated on In-hospital major bleeding (p=<0.01). Invasive management of NSTEMI in 2010 compared with 2007 was associated with significantly lower rates of in-hospital major bleeding (6.6% vs 8.7%, P<0.01).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: