Why the study?
Does the timing of percutaneous coronary intervention affect 3-month clinical outcomes in patients with unstable angina pectoris?
Observational (n=1,400)
Does the timing of percutaneous coronary intervention affect 3-month clinical outcomes in patients with unstable angina pectoris?
In German chest pain units, almost two-thirds of UAP patients at intermediate to high risk receive a rapid invasive regimen within the first 24 hours after admission.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Rapid invasive strategy predominates in unstable angina; leaves open whether PCI timing affects 3-month outcomes.
OBJECTIVE: Management of acute coronary syndromes without persistent ST-segment elevation (NSTE-ACS) and unstable angina pectoris (UAP) remains challenging. The study aimed to analyze the current management of UAP patients in German chest pain units focussing on the different time lines of invasive strategy. METHODS: A total of 1400 UAP patients admitted to a certified chest pain unit were enrolled. Analyses of high-risk criteria with indication for invasive management and of 3-month clinical outcomes were performed by subgrouping UAP patients to immediate and early invasive (<8 hours), early elective invasive (8-24 hours), late elective invasive (24-72 hours) strategy, and without percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). RESULTS: Coronary angiography was performed in 60.6% of the UAP patients, whereas PCI was necessary in 37%. Only 1.4% of the UAP patients obtained immediate PCI within the first 120 minutes. In 16.9%, patients received PCI within the first day of hospitalization or even within the first 8 hours after admission in another 7.7%, although the Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events (GRACE) score at admission was below 140. In the remaining 12.4% of the UAP patients, PCI was performed within 24-72 hours after admission. Those patients exhibited a higher prevalence of secondary risk markers than those with conservative treatment regimen. CONCLUSIONS: To date, almost two-third of UAP patients at intermediate to high risk receive rapid invasive regimen within the first 24 hours after admission. Oncoming studies will have to analyze its overall guideline-adherence and resulting differences in major adverse events.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Breuckmann et al. (2015) conducted an observational in Unstable angina pectoris (n=1,400). Timing of percutaneous coronary intervention vs. Conservative treatment regimen was evaluated on Timing of invasive strategy and 3-month clinical outcomes.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: