Management Patterns in Relation to Risk Stratification Among Patients with Non-st Elevation Acute Coronary Syndromes.
From: Division of Cardiology, St Michael’s Hospital, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada M5B 1W8.
Archives of internal medicine
- Publish Date: May 2007
- ISSN: 0003-9926
- Volume: 167
- Issue: 10
- Pages: 1009-16
- Medium: Print
- Language: English
- Citation (JAMA): Yan Andrew T, Yan Raymond T, Tan Mary, et al. Management Patterns in Relation to Risk Stratification Among Patients with Non-st Elevation Acute Coronary Syndromes.. Arch. Intern. Med. May 2007;167:1009-16
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Randomized clinical trials have established the efficacy of an early invasive management strategy for high-risk non-ST elevation acute coronary syndromes (ACSs). We examined the use of in-hospital cardiac catheterization and medications in relation to risk across the broad spectrum of non-ST elevation ACSs. METHODS: We evaluated 4414 patients with non-ST elevation ACSs in the prospective, multicenter, Canadian ACS 1 (September 1, 1999-June 30, 2001) and ACS 2 (October 1, 2002-December 31, 2003) Registries. Patients were stratified into low-, intermediate-, and high-risk groups based on tertiles of the calculated Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events risk score (a validated predictor of in-hospital mortality). RESULTS: Although in-hospital mortality rates were similar, the in-hospital use of cardiac catheterization increased significantly over time (38.8% in the ACS 1 Registry vs 63.5% in the ACS 2 Registry; P<.001). The rates of cardiac catheterization in the low-, intermediate-, and high-risk groups were 48.0%, 41.1%, and 27.3% in the ACS 1 Registry, and 73.8%, 66.9%, and 49.7% in the ACS 2 Registry, respectively (P<.001 for trend for both). After adjusting for other confounders, intermediate-risk (adjusted odds ratio, 0.75; 95% confidence interval, 0.63-0.90; P<.001) and high-risk (adjusted odds ratio, 0.35; 95% confidence interval, 0.28-0.45; P<.001) patients remained less likely to undergo cardiac catheterization compared with low-risk patients. Furthermore, there existed a similar inverse relationship between risk and the use of in-hospital revascularization and medications. CONCLUSIONS: Despite temporal increases in the use of cardiac catheterization and revascularization in the management of non-ST elevation ACSs, evidence-based invasive and pharmacological therapies remain paradoxically targeted toward low-risk patients. Strategies to eliminate this treatment-risk paradox must be implemented to fully realize the benefits and optimize the cost-effectiveness of invasive management.
Mesh Headings (Keywords): Acute Disease, Coronary Disease, Cost-Benefit Analysis, Electrocardiography, Female, Heart Catheterization, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Multicenter Studies as Topic, Prospective Studies, Risk Factors, Syndrome
Check for Full Text / PubMed Unique Identifier (PMID): 17533203
This abstract is part of PubMed, a service of the U.S. National Library of Medicine. PubMed includes more than 17 million citations from MEDLINE and other life science journals for biomedical articles. See Copyright and Disclaimers.
Linked medical terms appearing on this page are added by Healia to help readers find more information and are not part of the original PubMed document.
The data herein was last updated on July 8th, 2008 and may not reflect the most current and accurate data available from NLM.