4.6 Article

Timing of Coronary Invasive Strategy in Non-ST-Segment Elevation Acute CoronarySyndromesandClinicalOutcomes An Updated Meta-Analysis

期刊

JACC-CARDIOVASCULAR INTERVENTIONS
卷 9, 期 22, 页码 2267-2276

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jcin.2016.09.017

关键词

angiography; invasive; mortality; NSTE-ACS; percutaneous coronary intervention; timing

资金

  1. Assistance-Publique Hopitaux de Marseille [PHRC-15-197]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

OBJECTIVES The aim of this study was to compare an early versus a delayed invasive strategy in non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes by performing a meta-analysis of all available randomized controlled clinical trials. BACKGROUND An invasive approach is recommended to prevent death and myocardial infarction in non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes. However, the timing of angiography and the subsequent intervention, when required, remains controversial. METHODS A previous meta-analysis of 7 randomized clinical trials comparing early and delayed invasive strategies in non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes with 3 new randomized clinical trials identified in a search of the published research (n = 10 trials, n = 6,397 patients) was updated. RESULTS The median time between randomization and angiography ranged from 0.5 to 14.0 h in the early group and from 18.3 to 86.0 h in the delayed group. There was no difference in the primary endpoint of mortality (4% vs. 4.7%; random-effects odds ratio [OR]: 0.85; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.67 to 1.09; p = 0.20; I-2 = 0%). The rate of myocardial infarction was also similar (6.7% vs. 7.7%; random-effects OR: 0.88; 95% CI: 0.53 to 1.45; p = 0.62; I-2 = 77.5%). An early strategy was associated with a reduction in recurrent ischemia or refractory angina (3.8% vs. 5.8%; random-effects OR: 0.54; 95% CI: 0.40 to 0.74; p < 0.01; I-2 - 28%) and a shorter in-hospital stay (median 112 h [interquartile range: 61 to 158 h] vs. 168 h [interquartile range: 90.3 to 192 h]; random-effects standardized mean difference -0.40; 95% CI: -0.59 to -0.21; p < 0.01; I-2 = 79%). Major bleeding was similar in the 2 groups (3.9% vs. 4.2%; random-effects OR: 0.94; 95% CI: 0.73 to 1.22; p = 0.64; I-2 = 0%). CONCLUSIONS An early invasive strategy does not reduce the risk for death or myocardial infarction compared with a delayed strategy. Recurrent ischemia and length of stay were significantly reduced with an early invasive strategy. (C) 2016 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据