Culprit Vessel Only vs Immediate Complete Revascularization in Patients With Acute ST‐Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction: Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis

Although multivessel coronary artery disease has been associated with poor health outcomes in patients with acute ST‐segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), the optimal approach to revascularization remains uncertain. The objective of this review was to determine the benefits and harms of culprit vessel only vs immediate complete percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with acute STEMI. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials, and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) for randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Teams of 2 reviewers, independently and in duplicate, screened titles and abstracts, completed full‐text reviews, and abstracted data. We calculated pooled risk ratios (RRs) and associated 95% confidence intervals (CIs) using random‐effect models for nonfatal myocardial infarction (MI), revascularization, cardiovascular mortality, all‐cause mortality, and adverse events, and used the GRADE approach to rate confidence in estimates of effect. Of 341 patients randomized to complete revascularization and followed to study conclusion, 31 experienced revascularization, as did 80 of 324 randomized to culprit vessel only revascularization (RR: 0.35, 95% CI: 0.24‐0.53). Ten patients in the complete revascularization group and 28 patients in the culprit vessel only revascularization group experienced nonfatal MI (RR: 0.35, 95% CI: 0.17‐0.72). All‐cause mortality and cardiac deaths did not differ between groups (RR: 0.69, 95% CI: 0.40‐1.21 for all‐cause mortality; RR: 0.48, 95% CI: 0.22‐1.04 for cardiac deaths). Pooled data from 3 RCTs suggest that immediate complete revascularization probably reduces revascularization in patients with acute STEMI; although results suggest possible benefits on MI and death, confidence in estimates is low.     

Fluvastatin Reduces Cardiac Mortality in Patients with Coronary Heart Disease

PURPOSE: To test the effectiveness of fluvastatin, 40-80 mg, in reducing the occurrence of cardiac and all-cause mortality in patients with coronary heart disease (CHD). METHODS: Meta-analysis of all clinical trials that assessed the effects of fluvastatin in CHD patients on major adverse cardiac events (MACE) as a prespecified endpoint was performed. A pooled analysis of four studies (n = 3525) was performed on an intent-to-treat basis. Clinical endpoints were the incidence, and time to first occurrence, of MACE (cardiac death, nonfatal MI, revascularization), noncardiac death, or all-cause death. Lipid parameters were also analyzed. RESULTS: Fluvastatin treatment significantly prolonged the time to cardiac death (p = 0.0174) and the time to cardiac death or nonfatal MI (p = 0.0055) compared with placebo. Fluvastatin significantly reduced the risk of any MACE (Cox risk ratio [RR], 0.85; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.73-0.98), cardiac death (RR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.31-0.90), cardiac death or MI (RR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.49-0.89), all-cause death (RR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.45-0.94) and all-cause death or MI (RR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.53-0.90). Fluvastatin significantly lowered total cholesterol and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels and was well tolerated, with no cases of rhabdomyolysis in any of the studies assessed in the meta-analysis. CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis demonstrates clear beneficial effects of fluvastatin on cardiac and all-cause mortality in CHD patients, and supports the use of fluvastatin to reduce the incidence of MACE in a wide range of at-risk patients.     

Assessment of Repeat Revascularization in Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Randomized Controlled Trials as a Surrogate for Mortality: A Meta-Regression Analysis

The association of repeat revascularization after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with mortality is uncertain. To assess the association of repeat revascularization after PCI with mortality in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD). We identified randomized controlled trials comparing PCI with coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) or optimal medical therapy (OMT) using electronic databases through January 1, 2022. We performed a random-effects meta-regression between repeat revascularization rates after PCI (absolute risk difference [%] between PCI and CABG or OMT) with the relative risks (RR) of mortality. We assessed surrogacy of repeat revascularization for mortality using the coefficient of determination (R2), with threshold of 0.80. In 33 trials (21,735 patients), at median follow-up of 4 (2-7) years, repeat revascularization was higher after PCI than CABG [RR: 2.45 (95% confidence interval, 1.99-3.03)], but lower vs OMT [RR: 0.64 (0.46-0.88)]. Overall, meta-regression showed that repeat revascularization rates after PCI had no significant association with all-cause mortality [RR: 1.01 (0.99-1.02); R2=0.10) or cardiovascular mortality [RR: 1.01 (CI: 0.99-1.03); R2=0.09]. In PCI vs CABG (R2=0.0) or PCI vs OMT trials (R2=0.28), repeat revascularization did not meet the threshold for surrogacy for all-cause or cardiovascular mortality (R2=0.0). We observed concordant results for subgroup analyses (enrollment time, follow-up, sample size, risk of bias, stent types, and coronary artery disease), and multivariable analysis adjusted for demographics, comorbidities, risk of bias, MI, and follow-up duration. In summary, this meta-regression did not establish repeat revascularization after PCI as a surrogate for all-cause or cardiovascular mortality.     

Platelet reactivity-adjusted antiplatelet therapy in patients with percutaneous coronary intervention: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Numerous number of evidences show that high on-treatment platelet reactivity is a well-known risk factor for adverse events in patients after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Controversial situations still exist regarding the effectiveness of tailoring antiplatelet therapy according to platelet function monitoring. The PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Central databases were searched for randomized trials comparing platelet reactivity-adjusted antiplatelet therapy with conventional antiplatelet therapy in patients undergoing PCI. The primary end point was all-cause mortality, major adverse cardiac events (MACE) including cardiovascular (CV) death, nonfatal myocardial infarction (MI), definite/probable stent thrombosis (ST), revascularization, and stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA). The safety end point was defined as major bleeding events. We derived pooled risk ratios (RRs) with fixed-effect models. Six studies enrolling 6347 patients were included. Compared with conventional treatment, tailoring antiplatelet failed to reduce all-cause mortality (RR: 0.89, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.63–1.24, P = 0.48), MACE (RR: 1.02, 95% CI: 0.92–1.14, P = 0.69), MI (RR: 1.07, 95% CI: 0.95–1.21, P = 0.24), CV death (RR: 0.69, 95% CI: 0.40–1.19, P = 0.09), ST (RR: 0.83, 95% CI: 0.50–1.38, P = 0.23), stroke or TIA (RR: 1.08, 95% CI: 0.55–2.12, P = 0.83), revascularization (RR: 0.96, 95% CI: 0.69–1.33, P = 0.79), and major bleeding events (RR: 0.79, 95% CI: 0.53–1.17, P = 0.24).

Compared with traditional antiplatelet treatment, tailoring antiplatelet therapy according to platelet reactivity testing failed to reduce all-cause mortality, MACE, and major bleeding events in patients undergoing PCI.     

Comparison of mid‐ to long‐term clinical outcomes between anatomical testing and usual care in patients with suspected coronary artery disease: A meta‐analysis of randomized trials

Background

Controversies remain regarding clinical outcomes following initial strategies of coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) vs usual care with functional testing in patients with suspected coronary artery disease (CAD).

Hypothesis

CCTA as initial diagnostic strategy results in better mid‐ to long‐term outcomes than usual care in patients with suspected CAD.

Methods

We searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library for randomized controlled trials comparing clinical outcomes during ≥6 months' follow‐up between initial anatomical testing by CCTA vs usual care with functional testing in patients with suspected CAD. Occurrence of all‐cause mortality, nonfatal myocardial infarction (MI), and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), and use of invasive coronary angiography and coronary revascularization, were compared between the 2 diagnostic strategies.

Results

Twelve trials were included (20 014 patients; mean follow‐up, 20.5 months). Patients undergoing CCTA as initial noninvasive testing had lower risk of nonfatal MI compared with those treated with usual care (risk ratio [RR]: 0.70, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.52‐0.94, P = 0.02). There was a tendency for reduced MACE following initial CCTA strategy, but not for risk of all‐cause mortality. Compared with functional testing, the CCTA strategy increased use of invasive coronary angiography (RR: 1.53, 95% CI: 1.12‐2.09, P = 0.007) and coronary revascularization (RR: 1.49, 95% CI: 1.11‐2.00, P = 0.007).

Conclusions

Anatomical testing with CCTA as the initial noninvasive diagnostic modality in patients with suspected CAD resulted in lower risk of nonfatal MI than usual care with functional testing, at the expense of more frequent use of invasive procedures.

     

Pravastatin prevents clinical events in revascularized patients with average cholesterol concentrations. Cholesterol and Recurrent Events CARE Investigators.

OBJECTIVES: This analysis was carried out to determine if revascularized patients derive benefit from the 3-hydroxy-3 methylglutaryl coenzyme A (HMG-CoA) reductase inhibitor pravastatin. BACKGROUND: The HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors result in substantial reductions in serum cholesterol and stabilization of atherosclerotic plaques in patients with coronary artery disease. METHODS: Pravastatin was found to reduce clinical cardiovascular events in the Cholesterol and Recurrent Events (CARE) trial consisting of 4,159 patients with a documented myocardial infarction and an average cholesterol level (mean 209 mg/dl and all <240 mg/dl). A total of 2,245 patients underwent coronary revascularization before randomization including 1,154 patients with percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (PTCA) alone, 876 patients with coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) alone, and 215 patients with both procedures. Clinical events in revascularized patients were compared between patients on placebo and on pravastatin. RESULTS: In the 2,245 patients who had undergone revascularization, the primary endpoint of coronary heart disease death or nonfatal myocardial infarction (MI) was reduced by 4.1% with pravastatin (relative risk [RR] reduction 36%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 17 to 51, p = 0.001). Fatal or nonfatal MI was reduced by 3.3% (RR reduction 39%, 95% CI 16 to 55, p = 0.002), postrandomization repeat revascularization was reduced by 2.6% (RR reduction 18%, 95% CI 1 to 33, p = 0.068) and stroke was reduced by 1.5% (RR reduction 39%, 95% CI 3 to 62, p = 0.037) with pravastatin. Pravastatin was beneficial in both the 1,154 PTCA patients and in the 1,091 CABG patients who had undergone revascularization before randomization. CONCLUSIONS: Pravastatin reduced clinical events in revascularized postinfarction patients with average cholesterol levels. This therapy was well tolerated and its use should be considered in most patients following coronary revascularization.     

Safety and Efficacy of Ultra Short-duration Dual Antiplatelet Therapy After Percutaneous Coronary Interventions: A Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) is required after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) to reduce stent thrombosis, but DAPT increases bleeding risks. The optimal duration of DAPT that provides the maximum protective ischemic effect along with the minimum bleeding risk is unclear. This is the first meta-analysis comparing outcomes for 1-month versus longer DAPT strategies following PCI.We searched PubMed, Cochrane, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases (from inception to October 2021) for randomized controlled trials that compared 1-month duration vs > 1-month duration of DAPT following PCI. We used a random-effects model to calculate risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI). The co-primary outcomes for study selection were all-cause mortality, major bleeding, and stent thrombosis. Secondary outcomes included myocardial infarction (MI), cardiovascular mortality, ischemic stroke and target vessel revascularization. A total of five randomized controlled trials were included [n = 29,355; 1-month DAPT(n = 14,662) vs > 1-month DAPT (n = 14,693)]. There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups in terms of all-cause mortality (RR 0.89; 95% CI 0.78-1.03; P = 0.12) and stent thrombosis (RR 1.07; 95% CI 0.80-1.43; P = 0.65). Similarly, there were no significant differences in MI, cardiovascular mortality, ischemic stroke, and target vessel revascularization. The rate of major bleeding was significantly lower in the group treated with DAPT for 1-month (RR 0.74; 95% CI 0.56-0.99, P = 0.04).There is no difference in all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, MI, stent thrombosis, ischemic stroke, and target vessel revascularization with 1-month of DAPT following PCI with contemporary drug eluting stents compared to longer DAPT duration.     

Diuretic versus alpha-blocker as first-step antihypertensive therapy: final results from the Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial (ALLHAT)

The Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial (ALLHAT) was a randomized, double-blind, active, controlled clinical trial conducted to determine whether newer antihypertensive agents, including doxazosin, an alpha-blocker, differ from chlorthalidone, a diuretic, with respect to coronary heart disease (CHD) and other cardiovascular disease (CVD) events in hypertensive patients at high risk of CHD. In February 2000, the doxazosin treatment arm was discontinued, and findings through December 1999 were reported. This report includes an additional 9232 participant-years and 939 CVD events. At 623 clinical centers, patients (aged >or=55 years) with hypertension and at least 1 other CHD risk factor were randomly assigned to either chlorthalidone or doxazosin. The primary outcome measure was the combined occurrence of fatal CHD or nonfatal myocardial infarction (MI), analyzed by intent to treat; prespecified secondary outcome measures included all-cause mortality, stroke, combined CHD (fatal CHD, nonfatal MI, hospitalized angina, and coronary revascularization), and combined CVD (combined CHD, stroke, angina treated outside the hospital, heart failure, and peripheral arterial disease). Mean follow-up was 3.2 years. There was no difference in primary outcome between the arms (relative risk [RR], 1.02; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.92 to 1.15). All-cause mortality also did not differ (RR, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.94 to 1.13). However, the doxazosin arm compared with the chlorthalidone arm had a higher risk of stroke (RR, 1.26; 95% CI, 1.10 to 1.46) and combined CVD (RR 1.20; 95% CI, 1.13 to 1.27). These findings confirm the superiority of diuretic-based over alpha-blocker-based antihypertensive treatment for the prevention of CVD.     

Prediction of mortality in patients with left ventricular hypertrophy by clinical,exercise stress,and echocardiographic data

OBJECTIVES: This study evaluated the clinical, exercise stress test, and echocardiographic predictors of mortality and cardiac events in patients with left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH). BACKGROUND: Left ventricular hypertrophy is associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. METHODS: Symptom-limited treadmill exercise echocardiography was performed for evaluation of coronary artery disease in 483 patients (age, 66 +/- 11 years; 281 men) with LVH. End points during follow-up were all-cause mortality and hard cardiac events (cardiac death and nonfatal myocardial infarction [MI]). RESULTS: Forty-six patients died and 14 had nonfatal MI. The cumulative mortality rate was higher in patients with abnormal exercise echocardiography (3% vs. 0.4% at one year, 11.7% vs. 3.7% at three years, and 18.3% vs. 9.5% at five years, p < 0.001). In a sequential multivariate analysis model of clinical, exercise test, and rest and exercise echocardiographic data, incremental predictors of mortality were workload (hazard ratio [HR], 0.5; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.3 to 0.9), rate pressure product (HR, 0.7; 95% CI, 0.5 to 0.9), left ventricular (LV) mass index (HR, 1.4; 95% CI, 1.1 to 1.8), and failure to increase ejection fraction (EF) with exercise (HR, 2.1; 95% CI, 1.1 to 3.8). Predictors of cardiac events were history of coronary artery bypass grafting (HR, 2.6; 95% CI, 1.2 to 5.4), lower exercise rate-pressure product (HR, 0.6; 95% CI, 0.5 to 0.8), resting wall motion score index (HR, 1.4; 95% CI, 1.1 to 1.8), and failure to increase EF with exercise (HR, 3.3; 95% CI, 1.6 to 6.9). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with LVH, LV mass index and EF response to exercise are independent predictors of mortality, incremental to clinical and exercise test data and resting LV function. A normal exercise echocardiogram predicts a relatively low mortality rate during the following three years.     

2014 Eighth Joint National Committee Panel Recommendation for Blood Pressure Targets Revisited : Results From the INVEST Study

Background

The 2014 Eighth Joint National Committee panel recommendations for management of high blood pressure (BP) recommend a systolic BP threshold for initiation of drug therapy and a therapeutic target of <150 mm Hg in those ≥60 years of age, a departure from prior recommendations of <140 mm Hg. However, it is not known whether this is an optimal choice, especially for the large population with coronary artery disease (CAD).

Objectives

This study sought to evaluate optimal BP in patients ≥60 years of age.

Methods

Patients 60 years of age or older with CAD and baseline systolic BP >150 mm Hg randomized to a treatment strategy on the basis of either atenolol/hydrochlorothiazide or verapamil-SR (sustained release)/trandolapril in INVEST (INternational VErapamil SR Trandolapril STudy) were categorized into 3 groups on the basis of achieved on-treatment systolic BP: group 1, <140 mm Hg; group 2, 140 to <150 mm Hg; and group 3, ≥150 mm Hg. Primary outcome was first occurrence of all-cause death, nonfatal myocardial infarction (MI), or nonfatal stroke. Secondary outcomes were all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, total MI, nonfatal MI, total stroke, nonfatal stroke, heart failure, or revascularization, tabulated separately. Outcomes for each group were compared in unadjusted and multiple propensity score–adjusted models.

Results

Among 8,354 patients included in this analysis with an accumulated 22,308 patient-years of follow-up, 4,787 (57%) achieved systolic BP of <140 mm Hg (group 1), 1,747 (21%) achieved systolic BP of 140 to <150 mm Hg (group 2), and 1,820 (22%) achieved systolic BP of ≥150 mm Hg (group 3). In unadjusted models, group 1 had the lowest rates of the primary outcome (9.36% vs. 12.71% vs. 21.32%; p < 0.0001), all-cause mortality (7.92% vs. 10.07% vs. 16.81%; p < 0.0001), cardiovascular mortality (3.26% vs. 4.58% vs. 7.80%; p < 0.0001), MI (1.07% vs. 1.03% vs. 2.91%; p < 0.0001), total stroke (1.19% vs. 2.63% vs. 3.85%; p <0.0001), and nonfatal stroke (0.86% vs 1.89% vs 2.86%; p<0.0001) compared with groups 2 and 3, respectively. In multiple propensity score–adjusted models, compared with the reference group of <140 mm Hg (group 1), the risk of cardiovascular mortality (adjusted hazard ratio [HR]: 1.34; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.01 to 1.77; p = 0.04), total stroke (adjusted HR: 1.89; 95% CI: 1.26 to 2.82; p = 0.002) and nonfatal stroke (adjusted HR: 1.70; 95% CI: 1.06 to 2.72; p = 0.03) was increased in the group with BP of 140 to <150 mm Hg, whereas the risk of primary outcome, all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, total MI, nonfatal MI, total stroke, and nonfatal stroke was increased in the group with BP ≥150 mm Hg.

Conclusions

In hypertensive patients with CAD who are ≥60 years of age, achieving a BP target of 140 to <150 mm Hg as recommended by the JNC-8 panel was associated with less benefit than the previously recommended target of <140 mm Hg.     

Statins for secondary prevention in elderly patients: a hierarchical bayesian meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: This study was designed to determine whether statins reduce all-cause mortality in elderly patients with coronary heart disease. BACKGROUND: Statins continue to be underutilized in elderly patients because evidence has not consistently shown that they reduce mortality. METHODS: We searched 5 electronic databases, the Internet, and conference proceedings to identify relevant trials. In addition, we obtained unpublished data for the elderly patient subgroups from 4 trials and for the secondary prevention subgroup from the PROSPER (PROspective Study of Pravastatin in the Elderly at Risk) trial. Inclusion criteria were randomized allocation to statin or placebo, documented coronary heart disease, > or =50 elderly patients (defined as age > or =65 years), and > or =6 months of follow-up. Data were analyzed with hierarchical Bayesian modeling. RESULTS: We included 9 trials encompassing 19,569 patients with an age range of 65 to 82 years. Pooled rates of all-cause mortality were 15.6% with statins and 18.7% with placebo. We estimated a relative risk reduction of 22% over 5 years (relative risk [RR] 0.78; 95% credible interval [CI] 0.65 to 0.89). Furthermore, statins reduced coronary heart disease mortality by 30% (RR 0.70; 95% CI 0.53 to 0.83), nonfatal myocardial infarction by 26% (RR 0.74; 95% CI 0.60 to 0.89), need for revascularization by 30% (RR 0.70; 95% CI 0.53 to 0.83), and stroke by 25% (RR 0.75; 95% CI 0.56 to 0.94). The posterior median estimate of the number needed to treat to save 1 life was 28 (95% CI 15 to 56). CONCLUSIONS: Statins reduce all-cause mortality in elderly patients and the magnitude of this effect is substantially larger than had been previously estimated.     

Effects of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor and angiotensin Ⅱ receptor blocker on one-year outcomes of patients with atrial fibrillation:insights from a multicenter registry study in China

ObjectiveTo evaluate the effect of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEI)/angiotensin II receptor blocker (ARB) therapy on the prognosis of patients with atrial fibrillation (AF).MethodsA total of 1, 991 AF patients from the AF registry were divided into two groups according to whether they were treated with ACEI/ARB at recruitment. Baseline characteristics were carefully collected and analyzed. Logistic regression was utilized to identify the predictors of ACEI/ARB therapy. The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality, while the secondary endpoints included cardiovascular mortality, stroke and major adverse events (MAEs) during the one-year follow-up period. Univariable and multivariable Cox regression were performed to identify the association between ACEI/ARB therapy and the one-year outcomes.ResultsIn total, 759 AF patients (38.1%) were treated with ACEI/ARB. Compared with AF patients without ACEI/ARB therapy, patients treated with ACEI/ARB tended to be older and had a higher rate of permanent AF, hypertension, diabetes mellitus, heart failure (HF), left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) < 40%, coronary artery disease (CAD), prior myocardial infarction (MI), left ventricular hypertrophy, tobacco use and concomitant medications (all P < 0.05). Hypertension, HF, LVEF < 40%, CAD, prior MI and tobacco use were determined to be predictors of ACEI/ARB treatment. Multivariable analysis showed that ACEI/ARB therapy was associated with a significantly lower risk of one-year all-cause mortality [hazard ratio (HR) (95% CI): 0.682 (0.527-0.882), P = 0.003], cardiovascular mortality [HR (95% CI): 0.713 (0.514-0.988), P = 0.042] and MAEs [HR (95% CI): 0.698 (0.568-0.859), P = 0.001]. The association between ACEI/ARB therapy and reduced mortality was consistent in the subgroup analysis.ConclusionsIn patients with AF, ACEI/ARB was related to significantly reduced one-year all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality and MAEs despite the high burden of cardiovascular comorbidities.     

How should patients with unstable angina and non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction be managed? A meta-analysis of randomized trials

PURPOSE: Patients with unstable angina or non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (MI) may be managed with either an "invasive" or "conservative" strategy. It is unclear which of these strategies is superior. METHODS: We identified studies with MEDLINE and EMBASE searches (1966-September 2003) and by reviewing reference lists. Studies were included if they were randomized controlled trials comparing management strategies for patients in the early post-unstable angina/non-ST-segment elevation MI period and had follow-up data for at least 3 months. RESULTS: Seven trials that randomized a total of 9212 patients were included. The pooled odds ratio (OR) for all-cause mortality was 0.96 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.72 to 1.27). The occurrence of fatal or nonfatal re-infarction was reduced with an invasive strategy (OR 0.73; 95% CI: 0.61 to 0.88) as was readmission to hospital (OR 0.67; 95% CI: 0.48 to 0.94). The endpoints of nonfatal MI and the composite of death or nonfatal MI showed nonsignificant trends favoring an invasive strategy. Trials that included a higher proportion of patients with ST-segment depression on admission and trials in which a larger proportion of patients underwent revascularization showed a greater magnitude of benefit for an invasive strategy. CONCLUSION: For patients with unstable angina/non-ST-segment elevation MI, an invasive strategy reduces rates of fatal or nonfatal re-infarction and hospital readmission, but not all-cause mortality, when compared with a noninvasive strategy. These results suggest that an invasive management strategy should be considered for all patients with unstable angina/non-ST-segment elevation MI and perhaps in particular those with ST-segment depression.     

Anxiety worsens prognosis in patients with coronary artery disease.

OBJECTIVES: This study examined the effect of anxiety on mortality and nonfatal myocardial infarction (MI) in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD). BACKGROUND: Inconsistent data exist regarding the impact of anxiety on the prognosis of patients with CAD. METHODS: The authors conducted a prospective cohort study at an outpatient cardiology clinic of 516 patients with CAD (mean age 68 years at entry, 82% male) by administering the Kellner Symptom Questionnaire annually. The primary outcome was the composite of nonfatal MI or all-cause mortality. RESULTS: During an average follow-up of 3.4 years, we documented 44 nonfatal MIs and 19 deaths. A high cumulative anxiety score was associated with an increased risk of nonfatal MI or death. Comparing the highest to lowest tertile of anxiety score, the age-adjusted hazard ratio was 1.97 (95% confidence interval 1.03 to 3.78, p = 0.04). In a multivariate Cox model after adjusting for age, gender, education, marital status, smoking, hypertension, diabetes mellitus, previous MI, body mass index, and total cholesterol, each unit increase in the cumulative mean anxiety score was associated with increased risk of nonfatal MI or total mortality; the hazard ratio was 1.06 (95% confidence interval 1.01 to 1.12, p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: A high level of anxiety maintained after CAD diagnosis constitutes a strong risk of MI or death among patients with CAD.     

Left ventricular geometry and survival in patients with normal left ventricular ejection fraction

In hypertensive populations, left ventricular (LV) geometry, which is characterized by hypertrophy, predicts cardiovascular outcome. The left ventricle can also alter its shape by concentric remodeling (CR) in the absence of LV hypertrophy, a feature that is detected by echocardiography. This study assessed the prevalence and prognostic significance of various forms of LV geometry and changes in LV geometry over time in patients with normal LV systolic function. Retrospective analysis of a large clinical population (n = 35,602) that was referred for echocardiography was done, with all-cause mortality as the primary outcome. Abnormal LV geometry was identified in 46% of patients, with CR present in 35% (n = 12,362) and LV hypertrophy in 11% (n = 3,958). Patients with abnormal LV geometry were older and more obese compared with subjects with normal LV geometry. There was a strong relation between abnormal LV geometry and mortality, and patients with CR and LV hypertrophy exhibited considerably higher relative risk for all-cause mortality compared with subjects with normal LV geometry (relative risk [RR] 1.99, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.88 to 2.18, p <0.0001; RR 2.13, 95% CI 1.89 to 2.40, p <0.0001, respectively). Subjects with CR who reverted to a normal geometric pattern had improved survival (RR 0.64, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.97, p = 0.03) compared with those who progressed to LV hypertrophy (RR 1.54, 95% CI 1.01 to 2.47, p = 0.05). In conclusion, CR, a form of cardiac adaptation, is frequently noted in patients with normal LV ejection fractions and confers a risk of death similar to that of LV hypertrophy. Normalization of CR is associated with better survival, whereas transition to LV hypertrophy increases mortality.     

Long-Acting Calcium Antagonists in Patients with Coronary Artery Disease: A Meta-Analysis

Background

The use of calcium channel blockers (CCBs) in patients with coronary artery disease remains controversial, with reports of increased risk of myocardial infarction and all-cause mortality. Short-acting CCBs have an unfavorable hemodynamic profile. The role of long-acting CCBs in patients with coronary artery disease is unknown.

Methods

MEDLINE/CENTRAL/EMBASE database were searched from 1966 to August 2008 for randomized controlled trials of long-acting CCBs in patients with coronary artery disease with follow-up for at least 1 year. We extracted from the studies the baseline characteristics and 6 outcomes: all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, nonfatal myocardial infarction, stroke, angina pectoris, and heart failure.

Results

Of the 100 randomized controlled trials of CCBs in patients with coronary artery disease, 15 studies evaluating 47,694 patients fulfilled our inclusion criteria. When compared with the comparison group (including placebo), CCBs were not associated with an increased risk of all-cause mortality (relative risk [RR] 0.99; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.94-1.05), cardiovascular mortality (RR 1.03; 95% CI, 0.95-1.11), nonfatal myocardial infarction (RR 0.96; 95% CI, 0.87-1.06), or heart failure (RR 0.86; 95% CI, 0.71-1.05), and with a 21% reduction in the risk of stroke (95% CI, 0.70-0.89) and 18% reduction in the risk of angina pectoris (95% CI, 0.72-0.94). When compared with placebo, CCBs resulted in a 28% reduction in the risk of heart failure (95% CI, 0.73-0.92). The results were similar for both dihydropyridines and nondihydropyridine CCBs.

Conclusions

In patients with coronary artery disease, long-acting CCBs (either dihydropyridines or nondihydropyridines), were associated with a reduction in the risk of stroke, angina pectoris, and heart failure, with similar outcomes for other cardiovascular events as the comparison group.     

Coronary revascularization for heart failure with coronary artery disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials

Aims

Coronary artery disease (CAD) is a common cause of heart failure (HF). Whether coronary revascularization improves outcomes in patients with HF receiving guideline-recommended pharmacological therapy (GRPT) remains uncertain; therefore, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

Methods and results

We searched in public databases for RCTs published between 1 January 2001 and 22 November 2022, investigating the effects of coronary revascularization on morbidity and mortality in patients with chronic HF due to CAD. All-cause mortality was the primary outcome. We included five RCTs that enrolled, altogether, 2842 patients (most aged <65 years; 85% men; 67% with left ventricular ejection fraction ≤35%). Overall, compared to medical therapy alone, coronary revascularization was associated with a lower risk of all-cause mortality (hazard ratio [HR] 0.88, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.79–0.99; p = 0.0278) and cardiovascular mortality (HR 0.80, 95% CI 0.70–0.93; p = 0.0024) but not the composite of hospitalization for HF or all-cause mortality (HR 0.87, 95% CI 0.74–1.01; p = 0.0728). There were insufficient data to show whether the effects of coronary artery bypass graft surgery or percutaneous coronary intervention were similar or differed.

Conclusions

For patients with chronic HF and CAD enrolled in RCTs, the effect of coronary revascularization on all-cause mortality was statistically significant but neither substantial (HR 0.88) nor robust (upper 95% CI close to 1.0). RCTs were not blinded, which may bias reporting of the cause-specific reasons for hospitalization and mortality. Further trials are required to determine which patients with HF and CAD obtain a substantial benefit from coronary revascularization by either coronary artery bypass graft surgery or percutaneous coronary intervention.     

Global differences in blood pressure control and clinical outcomes in the INternational VErapamil SR-Trandolapril STudy (INVEST)

BACKGROUND: The INternational VErapamil SR-Trandolapril Study (INVEST), a prospective, randomized, antihypertensive trial, found that two different medication regimens produced similar blood pressure (BP) control with equivalent cardiovascular (CV) outcomes (death from any cause, nonfatal myocardial infarction [MI], or nonfatal stroke). HYPOTHESIS: The study was undertaken to investigate whether differences exist by global regions in demographics, treatment, and outcomes in the INVEST trial. METHODS: Data were analyzed for 22,576 patients with stable coronary artery disease (CAD) enrolled in INVEST. We investigated differences in patient characteristics, treatment approaches, BP control, and clinical outcomes by creating three global regions based on geographical location: Northern Americas (NA), Caribbean (CA), and Eurasia (EA). RESULTS: We observed significant regional differences in patient characteristics, treatment patterns, BP control, and CV outcomes. At baseline, patients from NA were older and had greater body mass index, higher rates of diabetes, peripheral vascular disease, and coronary revascularization, but lower rates of MI or left ventricular hypertrophy than patients in CA and EA. At 24 months, there were regional differences in both study and nonstudy antihypertensive drug use. Despite having higher mean baseline BP, patients from CA and EA achieved lower mean systolic BP throughout study follow-up. Furthermore, patients from both CA and EA had lower rates of all-cause mortality, fatal or nonfatal MI, fatal or nonfatal stroke, and newly diagnosed diabetes than patients from NA. CONCLUSIONS: In INVEST, regional differences in medication utilization, BP control, and CV outcomes were identified. These disparities warrant further investigation to define appropriate care for patients with hypertension and stable CAD from an international public health perspective.     

Prognostic impact of different regional referral practices for interventional investigation and coronary treatment after exercise testing: a population-based 5-year follow-up study

OBJECTIVE: To examine the association among different centres' referral practices for coronary angiography (CAG) after exercise testing, with 1- and 5-year outcomes. DESIGN: Observational population-based cohort study. SETTING: All 10 hospitals and six private practising consultants in Aarhus and Ringkjoebing counties (900 000 inhabitants), Denmark. SUBJECTS: All patients who in 1996 had an abnormal bicycle exercise test (n = 736). MEASUREMENTS: Referral for CAG, coronary intervention, cardiovascular and all-cause mortality, and myocardial infarction (MI). RESULTS: As an immediate consequence of the exercise test, 60.7% of subjects were referred for CAG. Based on the centres' fraction of patients referred for CAG, three categories of centres were defined: low (<33%), intermediate (33-66%) and high (>66%). A low compared with a high referral fraction was associated with a similar 5-year mortality and MI ratio [all-cause/cardiovascular mortality rate ratio (RR) = 1.33, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.45-3.92/RR = 0.62, 95% CI: 0.25-1.57; and MI RR = 0.92, 95% CI: 0.45-1.86]. The same was found for an intermediate compared with a high fraction (all-cause/cardiovascular mortality RR = 0.92, 95% CI: 0.49-1.72/RR = 0.74, 95% CI: 0.42-1.33; and MI RR = 1.07, 95% CI: 0.68-1.70). Estimates were about the same after 1 year of follow-up with no major differences among centres in mortality or MI. CONCLUSIONS: Centres' different referral practices for interventional investigation and treatment were not associated significantly with short-term or long-term mortality or MI among patients with an abnormal exercise test.