Time to Coronary Angiography and Outcomes Among Patients With High-Risk Non–ST-Segment–Elevation Acute Coronary Syndromes: Results From the SYNERGY Trial

Background— Optimal timing for an early invasive strategy in patients with non–ST-segment–elevation acute coronary syndrome remains unclear. We evaluated the relationship between time from hospital admission to coronary angiography and outcomes in high-risk patients with non–ST-segment–elevation acute coronary syndrome who underwent angiography within 48 hours of admission. Methods and Results— Data from 10 027 patients enrolled in the Superior Yield of the New Strategy of Enoxaparin, Revascularization, and Glycoprotein IIb/IIIa Inhibitors (SYNERGY) trial were analyzed. Patients were grouped by 6-hour intervals of time from hospital admission to coronary angiography. Primary outcomes were 30-day death or myocardial infarction, in-hospital Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) and Global Utilization of Streptokinase and Tissue Plasminogen Activator for Occluded Coronary Arteries (GUSTO) major bleeding, and blood transfusion. Adjusted estimates of event rates were obtained by use of a multivariable methodology that included possible confounders through baseline and accounted for propensity of time to angiography. The landmark method was used to calculate odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals of outcomes for each time period adjusted for baseline and postbaseline clinical events. Overall, 9216 patients (92%) underwent angiography, 6352 (63%) within 48 hours. Unadjusted and adjusted rates of death/myocardial infarction increased with increasing time to angiography. The adjusted odds ratio for death/myocardial infarction in patients receiving angiography in <6 hours was 0.56 (95% confidence interval 0.41 to 0.74), whereas after 30 hours, there was no significant benefit compared with further delayed angiography. Major bleeding and transfusion did not vary significantly across time-to-angiography intervals. Conclusions— A decrease in the time to coronary angiography was associated with fewer ischemic outcomes and no increase in bleeding. Randomized clinical trials are needed to provide definitive evidence on optimal timing of coronary angiography but are difficult to design and conduct. Ongoing trials should instead clarify whether delaying angiography to administer aggressive upstream antithrombotic therapies is effective in the current setting of non–ST-segment–elevation acute coronary syndrome management.

[1]  F. Ragmin Invasive compared with non-invasive treatment in unstable coronary-artery disease: FRISC II prospective randomised multicentre study , 1999, The Lancet.

[2]  M. Flather,et al.  Relation of timing of cardiac catheterization to outcomes in patients with non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction or unstable angina pectoris enrolled in the multinational global registry of acute coronary events. , 2005, The American journal of cardiology.

[3]  Leo Smith,et al.  American Association of Cardiovascular and Pulmonary Rehabilitation , 1986 .

[4]  A. Kastrati,et al.  Evaluation of prolonged antithrombotic pretreatment ("cooling-off" strategy) before intervention in patients with unstable coronary syndromes: a randomized controlled trial. , 2003, JAMA.

[5]  L. Wallentin,et al.  Invasive compared with non-invasive treatment in unstable coronary-artery disease: FRISC II prospective randomised multicentre study , 1999 .

[6]  J. Ornato,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 Patie , 2007, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[7]  L. Wallentin,et al.  The prognostic and therapeutic implications of increased troponin T levels and ST depression in unstable coronary artery disease: the FRISC II invasive troponin T electrocardiogram substudy. , 2002, American heart journal.

[8]  J. Tijssen,et al.  Early invasive versus selectively invasive management for acute coronary syndromes. , 2005, The New England journal of medicine.

[9]  J. Ottervanger,et al.  Incidence and clinical significance of distal embolization during primary angioplasty for acute myocardial infarction. , 2002, European heart journal.

[10]  Adelaide,et al.  Bivalirudin for patients with acute coronary syndromes. , 2006, The New England journal of medicine.

[11]  P. Poole‐Wilson,et al.  5-year outcome of an interventional strategy in non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome: the British Heart Foundation RITA 3 randomised trial , 2005, The Lancet.

[12]  C. Cannon,et al.  Timing of angiography and revascularization in acute coronary syndromes: an analysis of the TACTICS-TIMI-18 trial. , 2004, Journal of interventional cardiology.

[13]  C. Vassanelli,et al.  [Comparison of early invasive and conservative strategies in patients with unstable coronary syndromes treated with the glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitor tirofiban]. , 2001, Italian heart journal. Supplement : official journal of the Italian Federation of Cardiology.

[14]  E. Braunwald,et al.  Comparison of early invasive and conservative strategies in patients with unstable coronary syndromes treated with the glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitor tirofiban. , 2001, The New England journal of medicine.

[15]  E. DeLong,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 , 2005, Circulation.

[16]  R. Califf,et al.  Enoxaparin vs unfractionated heparin in high-risk patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes managed with an intended early invasive strategy: primary results of the SYNERGY randomized trial. , 2004, JAMA.

[17]  R. Califf,et al.  The early glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibition in non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (EARLY ACS) trial: a randomized placebo-controlled trial evaluating the clinical benefits of early front-loaded eptifibatide in the treatment of patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndro , 2005, American heart journal.

[18]  Inhibition of platelet glycoprotein IIb/IIIa with eptifibatide in patients with acute coronary syndromes. , 1998, The New England journal of medicine.

[19]  E. Braunwald,et al.  Ability of minor elevations of troponins I and T to predict benefit from an early invasive strategy in patients with unstable angina and non-ST elevation myocardial infarction: results from a randomized trial. , 2001, JAMA.

[20]  R. Califf,et al.  Early angioplasty in acute coronary syndromes without persistent ST-segment elevation improves outcome but increases the need for six-month repeat revascularization: an analysis of the PURSUIT Trial. Platelet glycoprotein IIB/IIIA in Unstable angina: Receptor Suppression Using Integrilin Therapy. , 2002, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[21]  Inhibition of the platelet glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor with tirofiban in unstable angina and non-Q-wave myocardial infarction. , 1998, The New England journal of medicine.

[22]  S. Yusuf,et al.  Routine vs selective invasive strategies in patients with acute coronary syndromes: a collaborative meta-analysis of randomized trials. , 2005, JAMA.

[23]  J R Anderson,et al.  Analysis of survival by tumor response. , 1983, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[24]  J. Ottervanger,et al.  Time-to-treatment significantly affects the extent of ST-segment resolution and myocardial blush in patients with acute myocardial infarction treated by primary angioplasty. , 2004, European heart journal.

[25]  K. Fox,et al.  Interventional versus conservative treatment for patients with unstable angina or non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction: the British Heart Foundation RITA 3 randomised trial , 2002, The Lancet.

[26]  GlYcoprotein IIb,et al.  The SYNERGY trial: study design and rationale. , 2002, American heart journal.

[27]  Brent A. Johnson,et al.  Estimating Mean Response as a Function of Treatment Duration in an Observational Study, Where Duration May Be Informatively Censored , 2004, Biometrics.