Key result
Structured lifestyle interventions post-ACS fail to reduce MACE despite lowering non-fatal MI.
Why the study?
Structured lifestyle interventions are a cornerstone of preventing recurrence after ACS, yet evidence on their effectiveness across diverse outcomes and delivery models requires synthesis.
Do structured, multi-component lifestyle interventions reduce major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) and improve cardiovascular risk factors compared to usual care in adults post-ACS?
Systematic Review (n=9,000)
Do structured, multi-component lifestyle interventions reduce major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) and improve cardiovascular risk factors compared to usual care in adults post-ACS?
Hazard Ratio: 0.88 (95% CI 0.74–1.04)
Structured, multi-component lifestyle interventions post-ACS significantly improve cardiovascular risk factors, reduce non-fatal MI, and lower cardiovascular mortality, reinforcing their role as a critical adjunct to secondary prevention pharmacotherapy.
Reinforces structured lifestyle interventions as adjunct to pharmacotherapy post-ACS; supports consensus on secondary prevention despite non-significant MACE reduction.
Background: Structured lifestyle interventions are a cornerstone of preventing recurrence after Acute Coronary Syndrome (ACS), yet evidence on their effectiveness across diverse outcomes and delivery models requires synthesis. This study evaluated whether structured, multi-component lifestyle intervention programs reduce major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) and improve cardiovascular risk factors and quality of life compared to usual care in post-ACS patients. Methods: A systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was conducted. Databases (PubMed, Embase, CENTRAL, CINAHL) were searched for RCTs comparing multi-component lifestyle interventions (diet, exercise, smoking cessation) with usual care in adults post-ACS. Given substantial clinical and methodological heterogeneity across trials, findings were synthesized narratively rather than pooled quantitatively. Results: Fourteen RCTs (n>9,000 patients) were included. Interventions were delivered via cardiac rehabilitation, nurse-led, digital, and community health worker models. While the largest trials reported a non-significant reduction in its primary MACE endpoint (hazard ratio [HR] 0.88, 95% CI 0.74–1.04), significant reductions in key secondary endpoints like non-fatal MI (HR 0.52) and cardiovascular mortality were observed. Other trials demonstrated significant reductions in rehospitalization and composite MACE. Interventions consistently and significantly improved systolic blood pressure, lipid profiles, body weight, physical activity, and smoking cessation rates. Conclusion: Structured lifestyle interventions post-ACS consistently and significantly improve cardiovascular risk factors and health behaviors. While effects on composite MACE are heterogeneous, significant benefits for key individual hard outcomes and mortality are evident, particularly with intensive, sustained programs. These findings reinforce the critical role of structured lifestyle support as an adjunct to pharmacotherapy in secondary prevention.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Alhomaid et al. (2026) conducted a systematic review in Acute Coronary Syndrome (ACS) (n=9,000). Structured multi-component lifestyle interventions vs. usual care was evaluated on Major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) (HR 0.88, 95% CI 0.74-1.04). Structured lifestyle interventions post-ACS showed a non-significant reduction in MACE in the largest trials (HR 0.88; 95% CI 0.74-1.04), but significantly reduced non-fatal MI and improved risk factors.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: