Dataset Information

Management of Persistent Angina After Myocardial Infarction Treated With Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Insights From the TRANSLATE-ACS Study.

ABSTRACT: Angina has important implications for patients' quality of life and healthcare utilization. Angina management after acute myocardial infarction (MI) treated with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is unknown.TRANSLATE-ACS (Treatment With Adenosine Diphosphate Receptor Inhibitors: Longitudinal Assessment of Treatment Patterns and Events After Acute Coronary Syndrome) was a longitudinal study of MI patients treated with percutaneous coronary intervention at 233 US hospitals from 2010 to 2012. Among patients with self-reported angina at 6 weeks post-MI, we described patterns of angina and antianginal medication use through 1 year postdischarge. Of 10 870 percutaneous coronary intervention-treated MI patients, 3190 (29.3%) reported angina symptoms at 6 weeks post-MI; of these, 658 (20.6%) had daily/weekly angina while 2532 (79.4%) had monthly angina. Among patients with 6-week angina, 2936 (92.0%) received β-blockers during the 1 year post-MI, yet only 743 (23.3%) were treated with other antianginal medications. At 1 year, 1056 patients (33.1%) with 6-week angina reported persistent angina symptoms. Of these, only 31.2% had been prescribed non-β-blocker antianginal medications at any time in the past year. Among patients undergoing revascularization during follow-up, only 25.9% were on ≥1 non-β-blocker anti-anginal medication at the time of the procedure.Angina is present in one third of percutaneous coronary intervention-treated MI patients as early as 6 weeks after discharge, and many of these patients have persistent angina at 1 year. Non-β-blocker antianginal medications are infrequently used in these patients, even among those with persistent angina and those undergoing revascularization.

SUBMITTER: Fanaroff AC

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5721884 | biostudies-other | 2017 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Management of Persistent Angina After Myocardial Infarction Treated With Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Insights From the TRANSLATE-ACS Study.

Fanaroff Alexander C AC Kaltenbach Lisa A LA Peterson Eric D ED Hess Connie N CN Cohen David J DJ Fonarow Gregg C GC Wang Tracy Y TY

Journal of the American Heart Association 20171019 10

<h4>Background</h4>Angina has important implications for patients' quality of life and healthcare utilization. Angina management after acute myocardial infarction (MI) treated with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is unknown.<h4>Methods and results</h4>TRANSLATE-ACS (Treatment With Adenosine Diphosphate Receptor Inhibitors: Longitudinal Assessment of Treatment Patterns and Events After Acute Coronary Syndrome) was a longitudinal study of MI patients treated with percutaneous coronary int ...[more]

PMID: 29051217

Similar Datasets

Project description:Among patients with acute myocardial infarction (MI) who have multivessel disease, it is unclear if multivessel percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) improves clinical and quality-of-life outcomes compared with culprit-only intervention. We sought to compare clinical and quality-of-life outcomes between multivessel and culprit-only PCI.Among 6061 patients with acute MI who have multivessel disease in the TRANSLATE-ACS (Treatment With Adenosine Diphosphate Receptor Inhibitors: Longitudinal Assessment of Treatment Patterns and Events After Acute Coronary Syndrome) study, we used inverse probability-weighted propensity adjustment to study the associations between multivessel and culprit-only intervention during the index PCI and major adverse cardiovascular events, unplanned all-cause readmission, and angina frequency at 6 weeks and 1 year. Multivessel PCI was performed in 1208 (20%) of patients with MI who had multivessel disease. Relative to the culprit-only intervention, patients receiving multivessel PCI were similarly aged and more likely to be seen with non-ST-segment elevation MI or cardiogenic shock. At 6 weeks, the initial multivessel PCI strategy was associated with lower major adverse cardiovascular events and unplanned readmission risks, whereas angina frequency was not significantly different between multivessel and culprit-only PCI. At 1 year, major adverse cardiovascular event risk was persistently lower in the multivessel PCI group (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.84; 95% confidence interval, 0.72-0.99), whereas long-term readmission risk (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.94; 95% confidence interval, 0.84-1.04) and angina frequency were similar between groups (adjusted odds ratio, 1.01; 95% confidence interval, 0.82-1.24). Similar associations were seen when patients with ST-segment elevation MI and non-ST-segment elevation MI were examined separately.Among patients with acute MI who have multivessel disease, multivessel PCI was associated with lower risk of all-cause readmission at 6 weeks and lower risk of major adverse cardiovascular events at 6 weeks and 1 year. However, similar short- and long-term angina frequencies were noted.

Project description:Background Hospitalization for acute myocardial infarction (MI) in the United States is both common and expensive, but those features alone provide little insight into cost-saving opportunities. Methods and Results To understand the cost drivers during hospitalization for acute MI and in the following year, we prospectively studied 11 969 patients with acute MI undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention at 233 US hospitals (2010-2013) from the TRANSLATE-ACS (Treatment With ADP Receptor Inhibitors: Longitudinal Assessment of Treatment Patterns and Events After Acute Coronary Syndrome) registry. Baseline costs were collected in a random subset (n=4619 patients, 54% ST-segment-elevation MI [STEMI]), while follow-up costs out to 1 year were collected for all patients. The mean index length of stay was 3.1 days (for both STEMI and non-STEMI) and mean intensive care unit length of stay was 1.2 days (1.4 days for STEMI and 1.0 days for non-STEMI). Index hospital costs averaged $18 931 ($19 327 for STEMI, $18 465 for non-STEMI), with 45% catheterization laboratory-related and 20% attributable to postprocedure hospital stay. Patient factors, including severity of illness and extent of coronary disease, and hospital characteristics, including for profit status and geographic region, identified significant variations in cost. Intensive care was used for 53% of non-STEMI and increased costs by $3282. Postdischarge 1-year costs averaged $8037, and 48% of patients were rehospitalized (half within 2 months and 57% with a cardiovascular diagnosis). Conclusions While much of the cost of patients with acute MI treated with percutaneous coronary intervention is probably not modifiable by the care team, cost reductions are still possible through quality-preserving practice efficiencies, such as need-based use rather than routine use of intensive care unit for patients with stable non-STEMI. Clinical Trial Registration URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT00097591.

Project description:Preinfarction angina may act as a clinical surrogate of ischemic preconditioning that may reduce infarct size and improve mortality in the setting of thrombolytic therapy for ST-elevation myocardial infarction. However, the benefits of preinfarction angina in the setting of primary percutaneous coronary intervention with stenting is inconclusive because of the greater achievement of infarct artery patency and speed of reperfusion.To identify a homogeneous population, we performed a retrospective analysis of 1031 patients admitted with a first ST-elevation myocardial infarction with ischemic times between 1 and 6 hours who received primary percutaneous coronary intervention. We identified 245 patients who had occluded arteries on presentation, of which 79 patients had documented preinfarction angina defined as chest pain within 24 hours of infarction. Infarct size was measured as the peak creatine kinase level, a metric supported in a subgroup by late enhancement on cardiac magnetic resonance imaging. Patients with preinfarction angina (n=79) had a 50% reduction in infarct size compared with those patients without preinfarction angina (n=166) by both peak creatine kinase (1094±75 IU/L versus 2270±102 IU/L; P<0.0001) and creatine kinase area under curve (18 420±18 941 versus 36 810±21 741 IU/h per liter; P<0.0001) despite having identical ischemic times (185±8 minutes versus 181±5 minutes; P=0.67) and angiographic area at risk (24.1±1.2% versus 25.3±0.9%; P=0.43). There was an absolute 4% improvement in left ventricular ejection fraction before discharge in those patients with preinfarction angina (P<0.02).The occurrence of preinfarction angina is associated with significant myocardial protection in the setting of primary percutaneous coronary intervention with stenting during ST-elevation myocardial infarction. Because preinfarction angina is relatively common, it is important that these patients be identified in clinical trials investigating therapies designed to reduce reperfusion injury and infarct size.

Project description:It is unclear whether stable, high-risk patients with persistent total occlusion of the infarct-related coronary artery identified after the currently accepted period for myocardial salvage has passed should undergo percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in addition to receiving optimal medical therapy to reduce the risk of subsequent events.We conducted a randomized study involving 2166 stable patients who had total occlusion of the infarct-related artery 3 to 28 days after myocardial infarction and who met a high-risk criterion (an ejection fraction of <50% or proximal occlusion). Of these patients, 1082 were assigned to routine PCI and stenting with optimal medical therapy, and 1084 were assigned to optimal medical therapy alone. The primary end point was a composite of death, myocardial reinfarction, or New York Heart Association (NYHA) class IV heart failure.The 4-year cumulative primary event rate was 17.2% in the PCI group and 15.6% in the medical therapy group (hazard ratio for death, reinfarction, or heart failure in the PCI group as compared with the medical therapy group, 1.16; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.92 to 1.45; P=0.20). Rates of myocardial reinfarction (fatal and nonfatal) were 7.0% and 5.3% in the two groups, respectively (hazard ratio, 1.36; 95% CI, 0.92 to 2.00; P=0.13). Rates of nonfatal reinfarction were 6.9% and 5.0%, respectively (hazard ratio, 1.44; 95% CI, 0.96 to 2.16; P=0.08); only six reinfarctions (0.6%) were related to assigned PCI procedures. Rates of NYHA class IV heart failure (4.4% vs. 4.5%) and death (9.1% vs. 9.4%) were similar. There was no interaction between treatment effect and any subgroup variable (age, sex, race or ethnic group, infarct-related artery, ejection fraction, diabetes, Killip class, and the time from myocardial infarction to randomization).PCI did not reduce the occurrence of death, reinfarction, or heart failure, and there was a trend toward excess reinfarction during 4 years of follow-up in stable patients with occlusion of the infarct-related artery 3 to 28 days after myocardial infarction. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00004562 [ClinicalTrials.gov].).

Project description:Few studies have examined how antiplatelet therapies are selected during the routine care of acute myocardial infarction patients, particularly relative to the patient's estimated mortality and bleeding risks. We examined patients presenting with acute myocardial infarction treated with percutaneous coronary intervention at 233 US hospitals in the TRANSLATE-ACS observational study from April 2010 to October 2012. We developed a multivariable logistic regression model to identify factors associated with prasugrel selection. Prasugrel use rates and associated 1-year risk-adjusted major adverse cardiovascular events and Global Utilization of Streptokinase and t-PA for Occluded Coronary Arteries (GUSTO) moderate/severe bleeding outcomes were also examined in relation to predicted mortality and bleeding using the validated Acute Coronary Treatment and Intervention Outcomes (ACTION) risk prediction scores. Among 11 969 patients, 3123 (26%) received prasugrel at the time of percutaneous coronary intervention. The strongest factors associated with prasugrel use included cardiogenic shock (odds ratio [OR] 1.68, 95% CI 1.25-2.26), drug-eluting stent use (OR 1.45, 95% CI 1.31-1.62), and ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction presentation (OR 1.23, 95% CI 1.12-1.35). Older age (OR 0.57, 95% CI 0.0.53-0.61), dialysis (OR 0.56, 95% CI 0.32-0.96), prior history of stroke/transient ischemic attack (OR 0.52, 95% CI 0.38-0.73), and interhospital transfer (OR 0.50, 95% CI 0.46-0.55) were associated with lowest prasugrel selection. Prasugrel was used less often than clopidogrel in patients at higher predicted bleeding risk (21.9% versus 29.7%, P<0.001). Yet paradoxically, prasugrel was also less likely than clopidogrel to be used in patients with higher predicted mortality risk (21.1% versus 30.2%, P<0.001). Adjusted bleeding and outcomes events were similar among those receiving prasugrel and clopidogrel in the 4 subgroups of patients based on bleeding risk and ischemic benefits. In community practice, prasugrel use may be driven more by bleeding risk rather than ischemic benefit. This may result in underutilization of higher potency ADP receptor inhibitor among patients more likely to derive ischemic benefit.

Dataset Information

Management of Persistent Angina After Myocardial Infarction Treated With Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Insights From the TRANSLATE-ACS Study.

Publications

Management of Persistent Angina After Myocardial Infarction Treated With Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Insights From the TRANSLATE-ACS Study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets