Literature DB >> 23325526

Percutaneous coronary intervention versus optimal medical therapy for prevention of spontaneous myocardial infarction in subjects with stable ischemic heart disease.

Sripal Bangalore1, Seema Pursnani, Sunil Kumar, Pantelis G Bagos.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Contemporary studies have shown that spontaneous but not procedural myocardial infarction (MI) is related to subsequent mortality. Whether percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) reduces spontaneous (nonprocedural) MI is unknown. METHODS AND
RESULTS: PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) were searched for randomized clinical trials until October 2012 comparing PCI with optimal medical therapy (OMT) for stable ischemic heart disease and reporting MI outcomes: spontaneous nonprocedural MI, procedural MI, and all MI, including procedure-related MI. Given the varying length of follow-up between trials, a mixed-effect Poisson regression meta-analysis was used. From 12 randomized clinical trials with 37 548 patient-years of follow-up, PCI compared with OMT alone was associated with a significantly lower incident rate ratio (IRR) for spontaneous nonprocedural MI (IRR=0.76; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.58-0.99) at the risk of a higher rate of procedural MI (IRR=4.11; 95% CI, 2.53-6.88) without any difference in the risk of all MI (IRR=0.96; 95% CI, 0.74-1.21). The point estimate for PCI versus OMT for all-cause mortality (IRR=0.88; 95% CI, 0.75-1.03) and cardiovascular mortality (IRR=0.70; 95% CI, 0.44-1.09) paralleled that for spontaneous nonprocedural MI (but not procedural or all nonfatal MI), although these were not statistically significant.
CONCLUSIONS: PCI compared with OMT reduced spontaneous MI at the risk of procedural MI without any difference in all MI. Consistent with prior studies showing that spontaneous MI but not procedural MI is related to subsequent mortality, in the present report the point estimate for reduced mortality with PCI compared with OMT paralleled the prevention of spontaneous MI with PCI. Further studies are needed to determine whether these associations are causal.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23325526     DOI: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.112.131961

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Circulation        ISSN: 0009-7322            Impact factor:   29.690


  15 in total

1.  How cardiologists present the benefits of percutaneous coronary interventions to patients with stable angina: a qualitative analysis.

Authors:  Sarah L Goff; Kathleen M Mazor; Henry H Ting; Reva Kleppel; Michael B Rothberg
Journal:  JAMA Intern Med       Date:  2014-10       Impact factor: 21.873

Review 2.  [National disease management guidelines (NVL) for chronic CAD : What is new, what is particularly important?].

Authors:  K Werdan
Journal:  Herz       Date:  2016-09       Impact factor: 1.443

3.  Alpha-crystallin: an ATP-independent complete molecular chaperone toward sorbitol dehydrogenase.

Authors:  I Marini; R Moschini; A Del Corso; U Mura
Journal:  Cell Mol Life Sci       Date:  2005-03       Impact factor: 9.261

Review 4.  Medical Therapy With Versus Without Revascularization in Stable Patients With Moderate and Severe Ischemia: The Case for Community Equipoise.

Authors:  Gregg W Stone; Judith S Hochman; David O Williams; William E Boden; T Bruce Ferguson; Robert A Harrington; David J Maron
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2015-11-23       Impact factor: 24.094

Review 5.  Challenges with Evidence-Based Management of Stable Ischemic Heart Disease.

Authors:  Amit V Patel; Sripal Bangalore
Journal:  Curr Cardiol Rep       Date:  2017-02       Impact factor: 2.931

6.  Consideration of a new definition of clinically relevant myocardial infarction after coronary revascularization: an expert consensus document from the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions (SCAI).

Authors:  Issam D Moussa; Lloyd W Klein; Binita Shah; Roxana Mehran; Michael J Mack; Emmanouil S Brilakis; John P Reilly; Gilbert Zoghbi; Elizabeth Holper; Gregg W Stone
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2013-10-22       Impact factor: 24.094

7.  Is Better Patient Knowledge Associated with Different Treatment Preferences? A Survey of Patients with Stable Coronary Artery Disease.

Authors:  Neal Yuan; Christy Boscardin; Nadra E Lisha; R Adams Dudley; Grace A Lin
Journal:  Patient Prefer Adherence       Date:  2021-01-26       Impact factor: 2.711

8.  Invasive therapy versus conservative therapy for patients with stable coronary artery disease: An updated meta-analysis.

Authors:  Aviral Vij; Kameel Kassab; Hitesh Chawla; Amandeep Kaur; Vamsi Kodumuri; Neeraj Jolly; Rami Doukky
Journal:  Clin Cardiol       Date:  2021-03-20       Impact factor: 2.882

9.  Who is eligible for randomized trials? A comparison between the exclusion criteria defined by the ISCHEMIA trial and 3102 real-world patients with stable coronary artery disease undergoing stent implantation in a single cardiology center.

Authors:  Jarosław Wasilewski; Lech Poloński; Andrzej Lekston; Tadeusz Osadnik; Rafał Reguła; Kamil Bujak; Anna Kurek
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2015-09-15       Impact factor: 2.279

10.  Revascularisation versus medical treatment in patients with stable coronary artery disease: network meta-analysis.

Authors:  Stephan Windecker; Stefan Stortecky; Giulio G Stefanini; Bruno R da Costa; Bruno R daCosta; Anne Wilhelmina Rutjes; Marcello Di Nisio; Maria G Silletta; Maria G Siletta; Ausilia Maione; Fernando Alfonso; Peter M Clemmensen; Jean-Philippe Collet; Jochen Cremer; Volkmar Falk; Gerasimos Filippatos; Christian Hamm; Stuart Head; Arie Pieter Kappetein; Adnan Kastrati; Juhani Knuuti; Ulf Landmesser; Günther Laufer; Franz-Joseph Neumann; Dimitri Richter; Patrick Schauerte; Miguel Sousa Uva; David P Taggart; Lucia Torracca; Marco Valgimigli; William Wijns; Adam Witkowski; Philippe Kolh; Peter Jüni; Peter Juni
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2014-06-23
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.