Display Settings:

Format

Send to:

Choose Destination
JAMA. 2009 Sep 2;302(9):947-54. doi: 10.1001/jama.2009.1267.

Immediate vs delayed intervention for acute coronary syndromes: a randomized clinical trial.

Author information

  • 1Institut de Cardiologie, Bureau 2-236, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Pitié-Salpêtrière, 47 Boulevard de l'Hôpital, 75013 Paris, France. gilles.montalescot@psl.aphp.fr

Abstract

CONTEXT:

International guidelines recommend an early invasive strategy for patients with high-risk acute coronary syndromes without ST-segment elevation, but the optimal timing of intervention is uncertain.

OBJECTIVE:

To determine whether immediate intervention on admission can result in a reduction of myocardial infarction compared with a delayed intervention.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS:

The Angioplasty to Blunt the Rise of Troponin in Acute Coronary Syndromes Randomized for an Immediate or Delayed Intervention (ABOARD) study, a randomized clinical trial that assigned, from August 2006 through September 2008 at 13 centers in France, 352 patients with acute coronary syndromes without ST-segment elevation and a Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) score of 3 or more to receive intervention either immediately or on the next working day (between 8 and 60 hours after enrollment).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES:

The primary end point was the peak troponin value during hospitalization; the key secondary end point was the composite of death, myocardial infarction, or urgent revascularization at 1-month follow-up.

RESULTS:

Time from randomization to sheath insertion was 70 minutes with immediate intervention vs 21 hours with delayed intervention. The primary end point did not differ between the 2 strategies (median [interquartile range] troponin I value, 2.1 [0.3-7.1] ng/mL vs 1.7 [0.3-7.2] ng/mL in the immediate and delayed intervention groups, respectively; P = .70). The key secondary end point was observed in 13.7% (95% confidence interval, 8.6%-18.8%) of the group assigned to receive immediate intervention and 10.2% (95% confidence interval, 5.7%-14.6%) of the group assigned to receive delayed intervention (P = .31). The other end points, as well as major bleeding, did not differ between the 2 strategies.

CONCLUSION:

In patients with acute coronary syndromes without ST-segment elevation, a strategy of immediate intervention compared with a strategy of intervention deferred to the next working day (mean, 21 hours) did not result in a difference in myocardial infarction as defined by peak troponin level.

TRIAL REGISTRATION:

clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00442949.

Comment in

PMID:
19724041
[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
PubMed Commons home

PubMed Commons

0 comments
How to join PubMed Commons

    Supplemental Content

    Full text links

    Icon for Silverchair Information Systems
    Loading ...
    Write to the Help Desk