Kristina Lambrakis1, John K French2, Ian A Scott3, Tom Briffa4, David Brieger5, Michael E Farkouh6, Harvey White7, Anthony Ming-Yu Chuang1, Kathryn Tiver1, Stephen Quinn8, Billingsley Kaambwa9, Matthew Horsfall1, Erin Morton9, Derek P Chew10. 1. Department of Cardiology, Flinders Medical Centre, Adelaide, Australia. 2. School of Medicine, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia. 3. School of Clinical Medicine, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia. 4. School of Population and Global Health, University of Western Australia, Perth, Australia. 5. Department of Cardiology, Concord Hospital, Sydney, Australia. 6. Peter Munk Cardiac Centre and the Heart and Stroke Richard Lewar Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada. 7. Green Lane Cardiovascular Service, Auckland City Hospital, Auckland, New Zealand. 8. Department of Statistics, Data Science and Epidemiology, Swinburne University of Technology, Melbourne, Australia. 9. College of Medicine and Public Health, Flinders University of South Australia, Adelaide, Australia. 10. Department of Cardiology, Flinders Medical Centre, Adelaide, Australia; College of Medicine and Public Health, Flinders University of South Australia, Adelaide, Australia. Electronic address: derek.chew@flinders.edu.au.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Elevated troponin level findings among patients presenting with suspected acute coronary syndrome (ACS) or another intercurrent illness undeniably identifies patients at increased risk of mortality. Whilst enhancing our capacity to discriminate risk, the use of high-sensitivity troponin assays frequently identifies patients with myocardial injury (i.e. troponin rise without acute signs of myocardial ischemia) or type 2 myocardial infarction (T2MI; oxygen supply-demand imbalance). This leads to the clinically challenging task of distinguishing type 1 myocardial infarction (T1MI; coronary plaque rupture) from myocardial injury and T2MI in the context of concurrent acute illness. Diagnostic discernment in this context is crucial because MI classification has implications for further investigation and care. Early invasive management is of well-established benefit among patients with T1MI. However, the appropriateness of this investigation in the heterogeneous context of T2MI, where there is high competing mortality risk, remains unknown. Although coronary angiography in T2MI is advocated by some, there is insufficient evidence in existing literature to support this opinion as highlighted by current national guidelines. OBJECTIVE: The objective is to evaluate the clinical and economic impact of early invasive management with coronary angiography in T2MI in terms of all-cause mortality and cost effectiveness. DESIGN: This prospective, pragmatic, multicenter, randomized trial among patients with suspected supply demand ischemia leading to troponin elevation (n=1,800; T2MI [1,500], chronic myocardial injury [300]) compares the impact of invasive angiography (or computed tomography angiography as per local preference) within 5 days of randomization versus conservative management (with or without functional testing at clinician discretion) on all-cause mortality by 2 years. Randomized treatment allocation will be stratified by baseline estimated risk of mortality using the Acute Physiology, Age, and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) III risk score. Cost-effectiveness will be evaluated by follow-up on clinical events, quality of life, and resource utilization over 24 months. SUMMARY: Ascertaining the most appropriate first-line investigative strategy for these commonly encountered high-risk T2MI patients in a randomized comparative study will be pivotal in informing evidence-based guidelines that lead to better patient and health care outcomes.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Elevated troponin level findings among patients presenting with suspected acute coronary syndrome (ACS) or another intercurrent illness undeniably identifies patients at increased risk of mortality. Whilst enhancing our capacity to discriminate risk, the use of high-sensitivity troponin assays frequently identifies patients with myocardial injury (i.e. troponin rise without acute signs of myocardial ischemia) or type 2 myocardial infarction (T2MI; oxygen supply-demand imbalance). This leads to the clinically challenging task of distinguishing type 1 myocardial infarction (T1MI; coronary plaque rupture) from myocardial injury and T2MI in the context of concurrent acute illness. Diagnostic discernment in this context is crucial because MI classification has implications for further investigation and care. Early invasive management is of well-established benefit among patients with T1MI. However, the appropriateness of this investigation in the heterogeneous context of T2MI, where there is high competing mortality risk, remains unknown. Although coronary angiography in T2MI is advocated by some, there is insufficient evidence in existing literature to support this opinion as highlighted by current national guidelines. OBJECTIVE: The objective is to evaluate the clinical and economic impact of early invasive management with coronary angiography in T2MI in terms of all-cause mortality and cost effectiveness. DESIGN: This prospective, pragmatic, multicenter, randomized trial among patients with suspected supply demand ischemia leading to troponin elevation (n=1,800; T2MI [1,500], chronic myocardial injury [300]) compares the impact of invasive angiography (or computed tomography angiography as per local preference) within 5 days of randomization versus conservative management (with or without functional testing at clinician discretion) on all-cause mortality by 2 years. Randomized treatment allocation will be stratified by baseline estimated risk of mortality using the Acute Physiology, Age, and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) III risk score. Cost-effectiveness will be evaluated by follow-up on clinical events, quality of life, and resource utilization over 24 months. SUMMARY: Ascertaining the most appropriate first-line investigative strategy for these commonly encountered high-risk T2MI patients in a randomized comparative study will be pivotal in informing evidence-based guidelines that lead to better patient and health care outcomes.
Authors: Avinainder Singh; Ankur Gupta; Ersilia M DeFilippis; Arman Qamar; David W Biery; Zaid Almarzooq; Bradley Collins; Amber Fatima; Candace Jackson; Patrycja Galazka; Mattheus Ramsis; Daniel C Pipilas; Sanjay Divakaran; Mary Cawley; Jon Hainer; Josh Klein; Petr Jarolim; Khurram Nasir; James L Januzzi; Marcelo F Di Carli; Deepak L Bhatt; Ron Blankstein Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2020-03-10 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Anda Bularga; Caelan Taggart; Filip Mendusic; Dorien M Kimenai; Ryan Wereski; Matthew T H Lowry; Kuan K Lee; Amy V Ferry; Stacey S Stewart; David A McAllister; Anoop S V Shah; Atul Anand; David E Newby; Nicholas L Mills; Andrew R Chapman Journal: JAMA Netw Open Date: 2022-07-01
Authors: Ryan Wereski; Dorien M Kimenai; Anda Bularga; Caelan Taggart; David J Lowe; Nicholas L Mills; Andrew R Chapman Journal: Eur Heart J Date: 2022-01-13 Impact factor: 35.855
Authors: Claire E Raphael; Véronique L Roger; Yader Sandoval; Mandeep Singh; Malcolm Bell; Amir Lerman; Charanjit S Rihal; Bernard J Gersh; Bradley Lewis; Ryan J Lennon; Allan S Jaffe; Rajiv Gulati Journal: Circulation Date: 2020-01-06 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Andrew E Levy; Andrew Hammes; Debra L Anoff; Joshua D Raines; Natalie M Beck; Eric W Rudofker; Kimberly J Marshall; Jessica D Nensel; John C Messenger; Frederick A Masoudi; Read G Pierce; Larry A Allen; Karen S Ream; P Michael Ho Journal: Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes Date: 2021-03-03
Authors: Andrew P DeFilippis; Andrew R Chapman; Nicholas L Mills; James A de Lemos; Armin Arbab-Zadeh; L Kristin Newby; David A Morrow Journal: Circulation Date: 2019-08-16 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Anthony Ming-Yu Chuang; Mau T Nguyen; Ehsan Khan; Dylan Jones; Matthew Horsfall; Sam Lehman; Nathaniel R Smilowitz; Kristina Lambrakis; Martin Than; Julian Vaile; Ajay Sinhal; John K French; Derek P Chew Journal: PLoS One Date: 2021-03-12 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Andrew R Chapman; Philip D Adamson; Anoop S V Shah; Atul Anand; Fiona E Strachan; Amy V Ferry; Kuan Ken Lee; Colin Berry; Iain Findlay; Anne Cruikshank; Alan Reid; Alasdair Gray; Paul O Collinson; Fred Apple; David A McAllister; Donogh Maguire; Keith A A Fox; Catalina A Vallejos; Catriona Keerie; Christopher J Weir; David E Newby; Nicholas L Mills Journal: Circulation Date: 2019-10-07 Impact factor: 29.690