HOME SUBSCRIPTIONS CURRENT ISSUE PAST ISSUES CARDIOSOURCE SEARCH HELP FEEDBACK		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Abstract Figures Only Full Text (PDF) All Versions of this Article: j.jacc.2006.06.050v1 48/7/1319    most recent Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in ISI Web of Science Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (32) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Bavry, A. A. Articles by Askari, A. T. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Bavry, A. A. Articles by Askari, A. T.

FOCUS ISSUE: CARDIAC INTERVENTION: INTERVENTION IN ACUTE CORONARY SYNDROME

Benefit of Early Invasive Therapy in Acute Coronary Syndromes

A Meta-Analysis of Contemporary Randomized Clinical Trials

Anthony A. Bavry, MD, MPH^_*, Dharam J. Kumbhani, MD, SM, Andrew N. Rassi, MD, Deepak L. Bhatt, MD^_* and Arman T. Askari, MD^_*,_*

^_* Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio
Department of Internal Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
School of Medicine, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio.

Manuscript received April 5, 2006; revised manuscript received May 30, 2006, accepted June 6, 2006.

^_* Reprint requests and correspondence: Dr. Arman T. Askari, Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Cleveland Clinic, 9500 Euclid Avenue, Desk F15, Cleveland, Ohio 44195. (Email: askaria2{at}ccf.org).

	Abstract

Top Abstract Methods Results Discussion References

 
OBJECTIVES: This study sought to systematically determine whether early invasive therapy improves survival and reduces adverse cardiovascular events in the management of non–ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes.

BACKGROUND: Although early invasive therapy reduces recurrent unstable angina, the magnitude of benefit on other important adverse outcomes is unknown.

METHODS: Clinical trials that randomized non–ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome patients to early invasive therapy versus a more conservative approach were included for analysis.

RESULTS: In all there were 7 trials with 8,375 patients available for analysis. At a mean follow-up of 2 years, the incidence of all-cause mortality was 4.9% in the early invasive group, compared with 6.5% in the conservative group (risk ratio [RR] = 0.75, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.63 to 0.90, p = 0.001), and at 1 month (RR = 0.82, 95% CI 0.50 to 1.34, p = 0.43). At 2 years of follow-up, the incidence of nonfatal myocardial infarction was 7.6% in the invasive group, versus 9.1% in the conservative group (RR = 0.83, 95% CI 0.72 to 0.96, p = 0.012), and at 1 month (RR = 0.93, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.19, p = 0.57). At a mean of 13 months of follow-up, there was a reduction in rehospitalization for unstable angina (RR = 0.69, 95% CI 0.65 to 0.74, p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS: Managing non–ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes by early invasive therapy improves long-term survival and reduces late myocardial infarction and rehospitalization for unstable angina.

Abbreviations and Acronyms   CABG = coronary artery bypass grafting   CI = confidence interval   FRISC-II = Fragmin and Fast Revascularization During Instability in Coronary Disease   ICTUS = Invasive Versus Conservative Treatment in Unstable Coronary Syndromes Investigators   ISAR-COOL = Intracoronary Stenting With Antithrombotic Regimen Cooling Off   NSTE-ACS = non–ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome   PCI = percutaneous coronary intervention   RITA-3 = Randomized Intervention Trial of Unstable Angina   RR = risk ratio   TACTICS TIMI-18 = Treat Angina With Aggrastat and Determine the Cost of Therapy With an Invasive or Conservative Strategy—Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction   TRUCS = Treatment of Refractory Unstable Angina in Geographically Isolated Areas Without Cardiac Surgery   VINO = Value of First Day Coronary Angiography/Angioplasty in Evolving Non–ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction

	Methods

Top Abstract Methods Results Discussion References

 
Literature review.   We conducted a computerized literature search of the Medline and Google Scholar databases for randomized clinical trials in the English language from 1990 to 2006 using the search terms early invasive therapy, conservative therapy, unstable angina, non–ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, and acute coronary syndrome. We also corresponded with experts in the field and used the Science Citation Index to cross-reference any studies that met our selection criteria.

Selection criteria.   We selected studies that enrolled patients with a diagnosis of NSTE-ACS, and randomized individuals to early invasive therapy versus a more conservative approach. We required that glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors and/or thienopyridines, and coronary stents were available for use during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). We excluded studies that enrolled patients with chronic stable angina or with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, that used fibrinolytic agents, or that did not have reliable outcome data available.

End points/data extraction.   The primary end point was all-cause mortality. Secondary end points were nonfatal myocardial infarction and recurrent unstable angina that resulted in rehospitalization. We included all myocardial infarctions from each trial, rather than attempting to apply a uniform definition of myocardial infarction across all the studies. We tabulated overall rates of revascularization at the time of follow-up. Baseline information was tabulated, such as patient demographics, adjunctive medications, and the proportion of patients who received glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors and coronary stents. Three independent reviewers (D.J.K., A.N.R., and A.T.A.) tabulated each clinical outcome. Once an event occurred, that patient was censored from contributing to future similar outcomes. Discrepancies were resolved through a fourth reviewer (A.A.B.). The totality of data (i.e., cumulative events up to the extent of follow-up in each trial) was used to assess all outcomes, although restricted data (i.e., cumulative events up to a specific follow-up period) were used for subanalysis. Because some degree of invasive therapy and subsequent revascularization will invariably occur among conservatively treated patients both during the index hospitalization and after discharge, we performed a subanalysis on studies with a similar relative difference in use of revascularization between treatment arms at follow-up. We also performed subanalysis on studies based on the median time of angiography.

Statistical analysis.   We used the intention-to-treat principle to calculate risks. The risk for an outcome was defined as the number of cardiac events that occurred during clinical follow-up divided by the number of individuals randomized to invasive therapy or to conservative therapy. Risk ratios were defined as the risk of an outcome among those who received invasive therapy compared with the risk of the outcome among those who received conservative therapy. A Mantel-Haenszel model was used to calculate a summary statistic for each outcome. We assessed for heterogeneity between studies by computing the Q statistic and for publication bias by constructing a Begg funnel plot. Mean follow-up was weighted according to each individual trial’s sample size. All p values were 2-tailed, with statistical significance set at 0.05, and confidence intervals calculated at the 95% level. Analyses were performed using STATA software version 9.0. (Stata Corp., College Station, Texas).

	Results

Top Abstract Methods Results Discussion References

 
Baseline characteristics.   A total of 13 studies were initially identified; 3 studies were excluded for being noncontemporary (i.e., before the era of enhanced antiplatelet therapy and coronary stents) (8–10), 2 were excluded because fibrinolytic agents were used (11,12), and 1 study was excluded because patients had chronic stable angina (13). In all, there were 7 studies with 8,375 total patients that were included for analysis (Table 1) (3,7,14–21). Follow-up ranged from 1 month (ISAR-COOL [Intracoronary Stenting With Antithrombotic Regimen Cooling Off]) to 60 months (RITA-3 [Randomized Intervention Trial of Unstable Angina]), and 4 of the 7 studies have reported outcomes beyond 1 year. The weighted mean follow-up was 23.7 months. Completeness of follow-up ranged from 98.8% to 100%. All participants received aspirin and either unfractionated or low-molecular-weight heparin. Glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors were available during PCI in all trials except for VINO (Value of First Day Coronary Angiography/Angioplasty in Evolving Non–ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction), and during medical stabilization in TACTICS TIMI-18 (Treat Angina With Aggrastat and Determine the Cost of Therapy With an Invasive or Conservative Strategy—Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction) and ISAR-COOL. Thienopyridines were used as an adjunct to PCI in all trials.

All-cause mortality.   For the primary outcome of all-cause mortality, the weighted mean follow-up was 23.7 months. Among patients randomized to early invasive therapy compared with a more conservative approach, the mortality incidence was 4.9% versus 6.5% (risk ratio [RR] = 0.75, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.63 to 0.90, p = 0.001) (Fig. 1). The number needed to treat with early invasive therapy to save 1 life was 62 patients (p = 0.001). There was no evidence for heterogeneity among the studies (chi-square [6 degrees of freedom] 7.38, p = 0.29) or publication bias (p = 0.26). When the analysis was restricted to specific follow-up periods, the RR for mortality at 1 month was 0.82 (95% CI 0.50 to 1.34, p = 0.43); at 6 months 0.83 (95% CI 0.63 to 1.09, p = 0.19); at 12 months 0.80 (95% CI 0.61 to 1.06, p = 0.12); and at more than 24 months 0.75 (95% CI 0.61 to 0.92, p = 0.006) (Fig. 2).

View larger version (9K): [in this window] [in a new window] [Download PPT slide]   Figure 1 Relative risk of all-cause mortality for early invasive therapy compared with conservative therapy at a mean follow-up of 2 years. The results show a long-term survival benefit from early invasive therapy. CI = confidence interval; FRISC-II = Fragmin and Fast Revascularization During Instability in Coronary Disease; ICTUS = Invasive Versus Conservative Treatment in Unstable Coronary Syndromes Investigators; ISAR-COOL = Intracoronary Stenting With Antithrombotic Regimen Cooling Off; RITA-3 = Randomized Intervention Trial of Unstable Angina; RR = relative risk; TIMI-18 = Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction-18; TRUCS = Treatment of Refractory Unstable Angina in Geographically Isolated Areas Without Cardiac Surgery; VINO = Value of First Day Coronary Angiography/Angioplasty in Evolving Non–ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction.

View larger version (9K): [in this window] [in a new window] [Download PPT slide]   Figure 2 Relative risk of all-cause mortality for early invasive therapy compared with conservative therapy as a function of time. The results show a long-term survival benefit from early invasive therapy without an increase in early adverse events.

View larger version (9K): [in this window] [in a new window] [Download PPT slide]   Figure 3 Relative risk of all-cause mortality based on time of angiography and the extent of revascularization. The results show that invasive therapy at a median of 9.3 h does not provide a greater survival advantage compared with angiography at a median of 39.4 h. In contrast, when a large proportion of invasively treated patients relative to conservatively treated patients undergo revascularization by follow-up, there is a strong improvement in late survival.

Nonfatal myocardial infarction.   All trials reported nonfatal myocardial infarction as separate events, except for TIMI-18, which reported fatal and nonfatal myocardial infarction as a composite event. The cumulative incidence of nonfatal myocardial infarctions was 7.6% among recipients of early invasive therapy compared with 9.1% among conservatively treated patients over a weighted mean follow-up of 23.7 months (RR = 0.83, 95% CI 0.72 to 0.96, p = 0.012) (Fig. 4). The number needed to treat with early invasive therapy to prevent 1 myocardial infarction was 66 patients (p = 0.011). There was no evidence for publication bias (p = 0.99), although there was excess heterogeneity that was caused by increased postprocedural myocardial infarction in the ICTUS trial (chi-square [6 degrees of freedom] 21.30, p = 0.002). There was no longer heterogeneity when only spontaneous myocardial infarction in the ICTUS trial was analyzed (chi-square [6 degrees of freedom] 3.88, p = 0.69). When the analysis was restricted to specific follow-up periods, the risk for myocardial infarction was similar at 1 month (RR = 0.93, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.19, p = 0.57), at 6 months (RR = 0.90, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.06, p = 0.20), and at 12 months (RR = 0.95, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.12, p = 0.53), and was reduced at more than 24 months of follow-up (RR = 0.77, 95% CI 0.63 to 0.92, p = 0.007).

View larger version (9K): [in this window] [in a new window] [Download PPT slide]   Figure 4 Relative risk of recurrent nonfatal myocardial infarction for early invasive therapy compared with conservative therapy at a mean follow-up of 2 years. The results show a long-term reduction in myocardial infarction from early invasive therapy. Abbreviations as in Figure 1.

View larger version (8K): [in this window] [in a new window] [Download PPT slide]   Figure 5 Relative risk of recurrent unstable angina resulting in rehospitalization for early invasive therapy compared with conservative therapy at a mean follow-up of 13 months. The results show a long-term reduction in recurrent unstable angina from early invasive therapy. Abbreviations as in Figure 1.

	Discussion

Top Abstract Methods Results Discussion References

Trials that performed very early invasive therapy (median of 9.3 h) did not show an improvement in long-term survival compared with trials that performed later angiography (median of 39.4 h). The ISAR-COOL trial was the only trial in which both study arms underwent invasive therapy, and this study found that very early angiography (median of 2.4 h) was superior to delayed angiography (median of 86 h); however, it is also possible that delaying invasive therapy for nearly 4 days with continuous glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibition could have been harmful (21). Although later angiography in our analysis was associated with improved survival, we would caution against purposefully delaying invasive therapy because these trials were also those that revascularized a large proportion of early invasive patients relative to conservatively treated patients. These findings suggest that revascularization may be the key determinant and not the timeliness of invasive therapy in improving late clinical outcomes. The goal in the management of NSTE-ACS should be to perform early invasive therapy within 48 h. This view is also supported by recent insight from the CRUSADE registry, in which a delay of invasive therapy of 46 h was not associated with increased adverse events, compared with a delay of only 23 h (22).

The ICTUS trial documented a high incidence of postprocedural myocardial infarction, although this study used the lowest threshold for defining (creatine kinase-MB fraction more than the upper limit of normal) and the highest frequency of sampling (every 6 h after PCI for 24 h) for these events (7). Although this definition is consistent with the current consensus document of the joint European Society of Cardiology/American College of Cardiology (23), it is in contradistinction to the other trials, which generally only sampled blood once after PCI and defined a postprocedural myocardial infarction as a creatine kinase-MB >1.5 to 5 times the upper limit of normal. It is possible that the other trials in this analysis would have also documented the same finding had they used a similar threshold and frequency for detecting such events. The significance of increased postprocedural events has been controversial (24,25), although an analysis of over 14,000 NSTE-ACS patients showed that spontaneous myocardial infarction is associated with a 6% to 8% higher absolute mortality compared with postprocedural myocardial infarction (26). The FRISC-II trial also showed that over the long term, the benefit of revascularization seems to outweigh any early harmful effects. In this trial, mortality and myocardial infarction were both significantly reduced at 1 year from early invasive therapy despite a small excess in early myocardial infarctions (14).

The results of the ICTUS trial may have moved some practitioners to a state of uncertainty in regard to the optimal treatment of NSTE-ACS (7). In fact, an accompanying editorial to this trial suggested that the current American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association and European Society of Cardiology guidelines may need to be challenged (27). This position should be tempered by the current meta-analysis, which provides solid evidence that early invasive therapy results in a long-term survival advantage without early harm.

A strength of this study is that it reflects current practice. Analysis of noncontemporary trials performed before the era of potent antiplatelet therapies and coronary stents showed that early invasive therapy was associated with harm (5). Glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors and stents enhance the safety of PCI by decreasing major adverse cardiac events, including myocardial infarction and death (28–30). Additionally, a meta-regression identified glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors and stents to be the most significant predictors of event-free survival among invasively treated NSTE-ACS patients (31). Other concerns exist with noncontemporary trials such as VANQWISH (Veterans Affairs Non-Q Wave Infarction Strategies In Hospital), in which the use of heparin, beta-blockers, angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitors, and lipid-lowering therapies were encouraged, but not required (10), and in TIMI IIIb, in which half of the participants received tissue plasminogen activator (8), although fibrinolytic agents are now contraindicated in this population (1). Accordingly, for a meta-analysis to be relevant and guide management decisions, the studies that are included for analysis should reflect current practice (32).

The optimized medical management that conservatively treated patients received in the ICTUS trial needs to be emphasized. By discharge, 94% of conservatively treated patients were taking a statin, and 49% were taking clopidogrel. Both of these therapies have been shown to reduce composite cardiac outcomes, including mortality, in the management of NSTE-ACS (33–36). Although the current body of evidence clearly supports early invasive therapy in the management of NSTE-ACS, future research is needed to more precisely determine the optimal timing of this approach, the appropriate concomitant adjuvant therapy that is required, and whether additional risk stratification is needed before angiography is performed.

In summary, early invasive therapy in the management of NSTE-ACS provides a durable survival advantage without increasing early adverse events. This approach also reduces nonfatal myocardial infarction and recurrent unstable angina requiring rehospitalization.

	References

Top Abstract Methods Results Discussion References

 

1. Braunwald E, Antman EM, Beasley JW, et al. ACC/AHA guideline update for the management of patients with unstable angina and non–ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction-2002: summary article: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (Committee on the Management of Patients With Unstable Angina) Circulation 2002;106:1893-1900.[Free Full Text]
2. Bhatt DL, Roe MT, Peterson ED, et al. Utilization of early invasive management strategies for high-risk patients with non–ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes: results from the CRUSADE Quality Improvement Initiative JAMA 2004;292:2096-2104.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
3. Fragmin and Fast Revascularisation During Instability in Coronary Artery Disease Investigators Invasive compared with non-invasive treatment in unstable coronary-artery disease: FRISC II prospective randomised multicentre study Lancet 1999;354:708-715.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
4. Mehta SR, Cannon CP, Fox KA, et al. Routine vs selective invasive strategies in patients with acute coronary syndromes: a collaborative meta-analysis of randomized trials JAMA 2005;293:2908-2917.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
5. Bavry AA, Kumbhani DJ, Quiroz R, Ramchandani SR, Kenchaiah S, Antman EM. Invasive therapy along with glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors and intracoronary stents improves survival in non–ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes: a meta-analysis and review of the literature Am J Cardiol 2004;93:830-835.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
6. Bhatt DL. To cath or not to cath: that is no longer the question JAMA 2005;293:2935-2937.[Free Full Text]
7. de Winter RJ, Windhausen F, Cornel JH, et al. Early invasive versus selectively invasive management for acute coronary syndromes N Engl J Med 2005;353:1095-1104.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
8. TIMI IIIB Investigators Effects of tissue plasminogen activator and a comparison of early invasive and conservative strategies in unstable angina and non-Q-wave myocardial infarctionResults of the TIMI IIIB Trial. Thrombolysis in Myocardial Ischemia. Circulation 1994;89:1545-1556.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
9. McCullough PA, O’Neill WW, Graham M, et al. A time-to-treatment analysis in the Medicine versus Angiography in Thrombolytic Exclusion (MATE) trial J Interv Cardiol 2001;14:415-422.[Medline]
10. Boden WE, O’Rourke RA, Crawford MH, et al. Veterans Affairs Non-Q-Wave Infarction Strategies in Hospital (VANQWISH) Trial Investigators Outcomes in patients with acute non-Q-wave myocardial infarction randomly assigned to an invasive as compared with a conservative management strategy N Engl J Med 1998;338:1785-1792.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
11. SWIFT (Should We Intervene Following Thrombolysis?) Trial Study Group SWIFT trial of delayed elective intervention v conservative treatment after thrombolysis with anistreplase in acute myocardial infarction BMJ 1991;302:555-560.[ISI][Medline]
12. Madsen JK, Grande P, Saunamaki K, et al. Danish multicenter randomized study of invasive versus conservative treatment in patients with inducible ischemia after thrombolysis in acute myocardial infarction (DANAMI)Danish Trial in Acute Myocardial Infarction. Circulation 1997;96:748-755.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
13. Pfisterer M, Buser P, Osswald S, et al. Outcome of elderly patients with chronic symptomatic coronary artery disease with an invasive vs optimized medical treatment strategy: one-year results of the randomized TIME trial JAMA 2003;289:1117-1123.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
14. Wallentin L, Lagerqvist B, Husted S, Kontny F, Stahle E, Swahn E, FRISC II Investigators Outcome at 1 year after an invasive compared with a non-invasive strategy in unstable coronary-artery disease: the FRISC II invasive randomised trialFast Revascularisation During Instability in Coronary Artery Disease. Lancet 2000;356:9-16.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
15. Lagerqvist B, Husted S, Kontny F, et al. A long-term perspective on the protective effects of an early invasive strategy in unstable coronary artery disease: two-year follow-up of the FRISC-II invasive study J Am Coll Cardiol 2002;40:1902-1914.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
16. Michalis LK, Stroumbis CS, Pappas K, et al. Treatment of refractory unstable angina in geographically isolated areas without cardiac surgeryInvasive versus conservative strategy (TRUCS study). Eur Heart J 2000;21:1954-1959.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
17. Cannon CP, Weintraub WS, Demopoulos LA, et al. Comparison of early invasive and conservative strategies in patients with unstable coronary syndromes treated with the glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitor tirofiban N Engl J Med 2001;344:1879-1887.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
18. Spacek R, Widimsky P, Straka Z, et al. Value of first day coronary angiography/angioplasty in evolving non–ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: an open multicenter randomized trialThe VINO Study. Eur Heart J 2002;23:230-238.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
19. Fox KA, Poole-Wilson PA, Henderson RA, et al. Interventional versus conservative treatment for patients with unstable angina or non–ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: the British Heart Foundation RITA 3 randomised trialRandomized Intervention Trial of Unstable Angina. Lancet 2002;360:743-751.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
20. Fox KA, Poole-Wilson P, Clayton TC, et al. 5-year outcome of an interventional strategy in non–ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome: the British Heart Foundation RITA 3 randomised trial Lancet 2005;366:914-920.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
21. Neumann FJ, Kastrati A, Pogatsa-Murray G, et al. Evaluation of prolonged antithrombotic pretreatment ("cooling-off" strategy) before intervention in patients with unstable coronary syndromes: a randomized controlled trial JAMA 2003;290:1593-1599.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
22. Ryan JW, Peterson ED, Chen AY, et al. Optimal timing of intervention in non–ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes: insights from the CRUSADE (Can Rapid Risk Stratification of Unstable Angina Patients Suppress Adverse Outcomes With Early Implementation of the ACC/AHA Guidelines) Registry Circulation 2005;112:3049-3057.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
23. Alpert JS, Thygesen K, Antman E, Bassand JP. Myocardial infarction redefined—a consensus document of The Joint European Society of Cardiology/American College of Cardiology Committee for the redefinition of myocardial infarction J Am Coll Cardiol 2000;36:959-969.[Free Full Text]
24. Roe MT, Mahaffey KW, Kilaru R, et al. Creatine kinase-MB elevation after percutaneous coronary intervention predicts adverse outcomes in patients with acute coronary syndromes Eur Heart J 2004;25:313-321.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
25. Bhatt DL, Topol EJ. Does creatinine kinase-MB elevation after percutaneous coronary intervention predict outcomes in 2005?Periprocedural cardiac enzyme elevation predicts adverse outcomes. Circulation 2005;112:906-915.[Free Full Text]
26. Akkerhuis KM, Alexander JH, Tardiff BE, et al. Minor myocardial damage and prognosis: are spontaneous and percutaneous coronary intervention-related events different? Circulation 2002;105:554-556.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
27. Boden WE. Acute coronary syndromes without ST-segment elevation—what is the role of early intervention? N Engl J Med 2005;353:1159-1161.[Free Full Text]
28. Zhu MM, Feit A, Chadow H, Alam M, Kwan T, Clark LT. Primary stent implantation compared with primary balloon angioplasty for acute myocardial infarction: a meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials Am J Cardiol 2001;88:297-301.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
29. Boersma E, Harrington RA, Moliterno DJ, et al. Platelet glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors in acute coronary syndromes: a meta-analysis of all major randomised clinical trials Lancet 2002;359:189-198.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
30. Karvouni E, Katritsis DG, Ioannidis JP. Intravenous glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor antagonists reduce mortality after percutaneous coronary interventions J Am Coll Cardiol 2003;41:26-32.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
31. Biondi-Zoccai GG, Abbate A, Agostoni P, et al. Long-term benefits of an early invasive management in acute coronary syndromes depend on intracoronary stenting and aggressive antiplatelet treatment: a metaregression Am Heart J 2005;149:504-511.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
32. Bavry AA, Kumbhani DJ. Routine vs selective invasive strategies in acute coronary syndromes JAMA 2005;294:2844-2845.[Free Full Text]
33. Cannon CP, Braunwald E, McCabe CH, et al. Intensive versus moderate lipid lowering with statins after acute coronary syndromes N Engl J Med 2004;350:1495-1504.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
34. Yusuf S, Zhao F, Mehta SR, Chrolavicius S, Tognoni G, Fox KK. Effects of clopidogrel in addition to aspirin in patients with acute coronary syndromes without ST-segment elevation N Engl J Med 2001;345:494-502.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
35. Bavry AA, Mood G, Borek PP, Kumbhani DJ, Bhatt DL. Benefit of early statin therapy during acute coronary syndromes: a meta-analysis J Am Coll Cardiol 2006;47(Suppl A):205A.
36. Helton TJ, Bavry AA, Kumbhani DJ, Bhatt DL. Quantifying the risk and benefit of adding clopidogrel to aspirin in coronary disease Circulation 2005;112II-2093.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				R. Qayyum, J. Adomaityte, and M. R. Khalid Possible Benefit to Survival from Early Invasive Strategies in Patients with Acute Coronary Syndromes Ann Intern Med, June 3, 2008; 148(11): 884 - 884. [Full Text] [PDF]

				D. J. Kumbhani and A. A. Bavry Possible Benefit to Survival from Early Invasive Strategies in Patients with Acute Coronary Syndromes Ann Intern Med, June 3, 2008; 148(11): 883 - 884. [Full Text] [PDF]

				L. Holmvang and H. Mickley Review: Gender differences following percutaneous coronary intervention Therapeutic Advances in Cardiovascular Disease, April 1, 2008; 2(2): 109 - 113. [Abstract] [PDF]

				S. R. Mehta Clinical benefit and practical use of fondaparinux in the invasive management of patients with acute coronary syndromes Eur. Heart J. Suppl., April 1, 2008; 10(suppl_C): C14 - C21. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				American College of Cardiology/American Heart Asso, 2007 Writing Group to Review New Evidence and Upda, S. B. King III, S. C. Smith Jr, J. W. Hirshfeld Jr, A. K. Jacobs, D. A. Morrison, and D. O. Williams 2007 Focused Update of the ACC/AHA/SCAI 2005 Guideline Update for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., January 15, 2008; 51(2): 172 - 209. [Full Text] [PDF]

				S. B. King III, S. C. Smith Jr, J. W. Hirshfeld Jr, A. K. Jacobs, D. A. Morrison, D. O. Williams, 2005 WRITING COMMITTEE MEMBERS, S. C. Smith Jr, T. E. Feldman, J. W. Hirshfeld Jr, et al. 2007 Focused Update of the ACC/AHA/SCAI 2005 Guideline Update for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines: 2007 Writing Group to Review New Evidence and Update the ACC/AHA/SCAI 2005 Guideline Update for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention, Writing on Behalf of the 2005 Writing Committee Circulation, January 15, 2008; 117(2): 261 - 295. [Full Text] [PDF]

				G. W. Stone, J. H. Ware, M. E. Bertrand, A. M. Lincoff, J. W. Moses, E. M. Ohman, H. D. White, F. Feit, A. Colombo, B. T. McLaurin, et al. Antithrombotic Strategies in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndromes Undergoing Early Invasive Management: One-Year Results From the ACUITY Trial JAMA, December 5, 2007; 298(21): 2497 - 2506. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				S. Mantha, J. Foss, J. E. Ellis, and M. F. Roizen Intense Cardiac Troponin Surveillance for Long-Term Benefits Is Cost-Effective in Patients Undergoing Open Abdominal Aortic Surgery: A Decision Analysis Model Anesth. Analg., November 1, 2007; 105(5): 1346 - 1356. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				G. A. Diamond and S. Kaul COURAGE Under Fire: On the Management of Stable Coronary Disease J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., October 16, 2007; 50(16): 1604 - 1609. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				D. J. Kereiakes, P. S. Teirstein, I. J. Sarembock, D. R. Holmes Jr, M. W. Krucoff, W. W. O'Neill, R. Waksman, D. O. Williams, J. J. Popma, M. Buchbinder, et al. The Truth and Consequences of the COURAGE Trial J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., October 16, 2007; 50(16): 1598 - 1603. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				R. P. Giugliano and E. Braunwald The Year in Non ST-Segment Elevation Acute Coronary Syndrome J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., October 2, 2007; 50(14): 1386 - 1395. [Full Text] [PDF]

				D. B Mark Percutaneous coronary revascularisation: is it ever worth what it costs? Heart, October 1, 2007; 93(10): 1161 - 1163. [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. L. Anderson, C. D. Adams, E. M. Antman, C. R. Bridges, R. M. Califf, D. E. Casey Jr, W. E. Chavey II, F. M. Fesmire, J. S. Hochman, T. N. Levin, et al. ACC/AHA 2007 Guidelines for the Management of Patients With Unstable Angina/Non-ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (Writing Committee to Revise the 2002 Guidelines for the Management of Patients With Unstable Angina/Non-ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction) Developed in Collaboration with the American College of Emergency Physicians, the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, and the Society of Thoracic Surgeons Endorsed by the American Association of Cardiovascular and Pulmonary Rehabilitation and the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., August 14, 2007; 50(7): e1 - e157. [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. L. Anderson, C. D. Adams, E. M. Antman, C. R. Bridges, R. M. Califf, D. E. Casey Jr, W. E. Chavey II, F. M. Fesmire, J. S. Hochman, T. N. Levin, et al. ACC/AHA 2007 Guidelines for the Management of Patients With Unstable Angina/Non ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction Executive Summary: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (Writing Committee to Revise the 2002 Guidelines for the Management of Patients With Unstable Angina/Non ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction) Developed in Collaboration with the American College of Emergency Physicians, the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, and the Society of Thoracic Surgeons Endorsed by the American Association of Cardiovascular and Pulmonary Rehabilitation and the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., August 14, 2007; 50(7): 652 - 726. [Full Text] [PDF]

				S. R. Dixon, C. L. Grines, and W. W. O'Neill The Year in Interventional Cardiology J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., July 17, 2007; 50(3): 270 - 285. [Full Text] [PDF]

				Authors/Task Force Members, J.-P. Bassand, C. W. Hamm, D. Ardissino, E. Boersma, A. Budaj, F. Fernandez-Aviles, K. A.A. Fox, D. Hasdai, E. M. Ohman, et al. Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes: The Task Force for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Non-ST-Segment Elevation Acute Coronary Syndromes of the European Society of Cardiology Eur. Heart J., July 1, 2007; 28(13): 1598 - 1660. [Full Text] [PDF]

				K. A. A. Fox, P. G. Steg, K. A. Eagle, S. G. Goodman, F. A. Anderson Jr, C. B. Granger, M. D. Flather, A. Budaj, A. Quill, J. M. Gore, et al. Decline in Rates of Death and Heart Failure in Acute Coronary Syndromes, 1999-2006 JAMA, May 2, 2007; 297(17): 1892 - 1900. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				G. W. Stone, M. E. Bertrand, J. W. Moses, E. M. Ohman, A. M. Lincoff, J. H. Ware, S. J. Pocock, B. T. McLaurin, D. A. Cox, M. Z. Jafar, et al. Routine Upstream Initiation vs Deferred Selective Use of Glycoprotein IIb/IIIa Inhibitors in Acute Coronary Syndromes: The ACUITY Timing Trial JAMA, February 14, 2007; 297(6): 591 - 602. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. A. Bittl Accounting for ACUITY. N. Engl. J. Med., November 23, 2006; 355(21): 2249 - 2250. [Full Text] [PDF]

				New Meta-Analysis Confirms Benefit of Invasive Therapy in NSTEACS Journal Watch Cardiology, November 1, 2006; 2006(1101): 5 - 5. [Full Text]

This Article Abstract Figures Only Full Text (PDF) All Versions of this Article: j.jacc.2006.06.050v1 48/7/1319    most recent Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in ISI Web of Science Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (32) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Bavry, A. A. Articles by Askari, A. T. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Bavry, A. A. Articles by Askari, A. T.