Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2009 Nov;25(11):e370-6.
doi: 10.1016/s0828-282x(09)70163-1.

Temporal trends in the use of invasive cardiac procedures for non-ST segment elevation acute coronary syndromes according to initial risk stratification

Collaborators, Affiliations
Comparative Study

Temporal trends in the use of invasive cardiac procedures for non-ST segment elevation acute coronary syndromes according to initial risk stratification

S Jedrzkiewicz et al. Can J Cardiol. 2009 Nov.

Abstract

Background: Current guidelines support an early invasive strategy in the management of high-risk non-ST elevation acute coronary syndromes (NSTE-ACS). Although studies in the 1990s suggested that highrisk patients received less aggressive treatment, there are limited data on the contemporary management patterns of NSTE-ACS in Canada.

Objective: To examine the in-hospital use of coronary angiography and revascularization in relation to risk among less selected patients with NSTE-ACS.

Methods: Data from the prospective, multicentre Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events (main GRACE and expanded GRACE2) were used. Between June 1999 and September 2007, 7131 patients from across Canada with a final diagnosis of NSTE-ACS were included the study. The study population was stratified into low-, intermediate- and high-risk groups, based on their calculated GRACE risk score (a validated predictor of in-hospital mortality) and according to time of enrollment.

Results: While rates of in-hospital death and reinfarction were significantly (P<0.001) greater in higher-risk patients, the in-hospital use of cardiac catheterization in low- (64.7%), intermediate- (60.3%) and highrisk (42.3%) patients showed an inverse relationship (P<0.001). This trend persisted despite the increase in the overall rates of cardiac catheterization over time (47.9% in 1999 to 2003 versus 51.6% in 2004 to 2005 versus 63.8% in 2006 to 2007; P<0.001). After adjusting for confounders, intermediate-risk (adjusted OR 0.80 [95% CI 0.70 to 0.92], P=0.002) and high-risk (adjusted OR 0.38 [95% CI 0.29 to 0.48], P<0.001) patients remained less likely to undergo in-hospital cardiac catheterization.

Conclusion: Despite the temporal increase in the use of invasive cardiac procedures, they remain paradoxically targeted toward low-risk patients with NSTE-ACS in contemporary practice. This treatment-risk paradox needs to be further addressed to maximize the benefits of invasive therapies in Canada.

HISTORIQUE :: Les lignes directrices actuelles appuient une stratégie effractive précoce dans la prise en charge des syndromes coronariens aigus sans élévation du segment ST (SCA-SÉST) à haut risque. Même si, dans les années 1990, des études ont laissé supposer que les patients à haut risque recevaient un traitement moins énergique, les données sur la prise en charge courante des profils de SCA-SÉST demeurent limitées au Canada.

OBJECTIF :: Examiner l’utilisation de la coronarographie et de la revascularisation en milieu hospitalier par rapport au risque chez des patients moins sélectionnés ayant une SCA-SÉST.

MÉTHODOLOGIE :: Les auteurs ont utilisé les données de l’étude prospective multicentrique sur le registre mondial des événements coronariens aigus (étude GRACE principale et GRACE élargie2). Entre juin 1999 et septembre 2007, 7 131 patients de partout au Canada ayant un diagnostic définitif de SCA-SÉST ont participé à l’étude. Cette population était stratifiée en groupes à faible risque, à risque moyen et à haut risque, d’après l’indice de risque calculé pour l’étude GRACE (un prédicteur validé de la mortalité en milieu hospitalier) et le moment de leur inscription à l’étude.

RÉSULTATS :: Les taux de décès et de nouvel infarctus en milieu hospitalier étaient considérablement plus élevés (P<0,001) chez les patients à plus haut risque, mais l’utilisation du cathétérisme cardiaque en milieu hospitalier était inversement proportionnelle (P<0,001) chez les patients à faible risque (64,7 %), à risque moyen (60,3 %) et à haut risque (42,3 %). Cette tendance a persisté malgré l’augmentation des taux globaux de cathétérisme cardiaque au fil du temps (47,9 % de 1999 à 2003, par rapport à 51,6 % en 2004 et 2005 et à 63,8 % en 2006 et 2007; P<0,001). Après rajustement compte tenu des variables confusionnelles, les patients à risque moyen (RRR 0,80 [95% IC 0,70 à 0,92], P=0,002) et à haut risque (RRR 0,38 [95% IC 0,29 à 0,48], P<0,001) demeuraient moins susceptibles de subir un cathétérisme cardiaque en milieu hospitalier.

CONCLUSION :: Malgré l’augmentation temporelle de l’utilisation des interventions cardiaques effractives, dans la pratique actuelle, ces interventions demeurent paradoxalement ciblées vers les patients à faible risque ayant un SCA-SÉST. Il faut étudier davantage ce paradoxe entre le traitement et le risque pour maximiser les bienfaits des thérapies effractives au Canada.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1)
Figure 1)
Rates of in-hospital cardiac catheterization (Cath) across enrollment time periods in low-, intermediate- and high-risk patients as per the Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events (GRACE) risk score
Figure 2)
Figure 2)
Rates of in-hospital percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) across enrollment time periods in low-, intermediate- and high-risk patients as per the Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events (GRACE) risk score
Figure 3)
Figure 3)
Rates of in-hospital coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) across enrollment time periods in low-, intermediate- and high-risk patients as per the Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events (GRACE) risk score

References

    1. Braunwald E, Antman EM, Beasley JW, et al. ACC/AHA 2002 guideline update for the management of patients with unstable angina and non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction – summary article: A report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on practice guidelines. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2002;40:1366–74. - PubMed
    1. Anderson JL, Adams CD, Antman EM, et al. ACC/AHA 2007 guidelines for the management of patients with unstable angina/non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction. A report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2007;50:e1–57. - PubMed
    1. Bhatt DL, Roe MT, Peterson ED, et al. Utilization of early invasive management strategies for high-risk patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes: Results from the CRUSADE Quality Improvement Initiative. JAMA. 2004;292:2096–104. - PubMed
    1. Fox KA, Anderson FA, Jr, Dabbous OH, et al. Intervention in acute coronary syndromes: Do patients undergo intervention on the basis of their risk characteristics? The Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events (GRACE) Heart. 2007;93:177–82. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Zia MI, Goodman SG, Peterson ED, et al. Paradoxical use of invasive cardiac procedures for patients with non-ST segment elevation myocardial infarction: An international perspective from the CRUSADE Initiative and the Canadian ACS Registries I and II. Can J Cardiol. 2007;23:1073–9. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms