Coronary disease MANAGEMENT OF ACUTE CORONARY SYNDROMES : AN UPDATE Keith A A Fox

Correspondence to: Professor Keith A A Fox, Cardiovascular Research Unit, Centre for Cardiovascular Science, University of Edinburgh, Chancellor’s Building, 49 Little France Crescent, Edinburgh EH16 4SB, UK; k.a.a.fox@ed.ac.uk _________________________ A cute coronary syndrome (ACS) describes a spectrum of clinical conditions ranging from ST segment elevation myocardial infarction (MI) to non-ST segment elevation MI and unstable angina (ACS without enzyme or marker release) (fig 1). The syndrome is the consequence of disruption of a vulnerable coronary artery plaque, complicated by intraluminal thrombosis, embolisation, and varying degrees of obstruction to perfusion (figs 2 and 3). The severity of coronary arterial obstruction and the volume of affected myocardium determine the characteristics of clinical presentation. Patients with complete occlusion may manifest ST segment elevation infarction if the lesion occludes an artery supplying a substantial volume of myocardium, but the same occlusion in the presence of extensive collateralisation may manifest as infarction without ST segment elevation (non-ST elevation ACS). Similarly, incomplete occlusion at the site of a disrupted arterial plaque may produce ischaemia or microinfarction, depending on the volume of myocardium affected and the extent of distal embolisation. Sensitive and specific markers of myocyte injury (troponins) allow the detection of more subtle volumes of infarction than possible using conventional cardiac enzymes. The consequences of ACS are not benign. Among those who survive to reach hospital alive, approximately 12% of patients with ST segment elevation MI will die in the succeeding six months, 13% of those with non-ST segment elevation ACS and 8% with unstable angina (GRACE registry). The frequency of new stroke is between 1.5–3% and rehospitalisation for a further ACS, between 17–20% in the same time interval.

[1]  E. Topol,et al.  A preferred reperfusion strategy for acute myocardial infarction. , 2003, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[2]  Á. Avezum,et al.  Predictors of hospital mortality in the global registry of acute coronary events. , 2003, Archives of internal medicine.

[3]  W. Weaver,et al.  Oral ximelagatran for secondary prophylaxis after myocardial infarction: the ESTEEM randomised controlled trial , 2003, The Lancet.

[4]  J. Gore,et al.  Creatinine clearance and adverse hospital outcomes in patients with acute coronary syndromes: findings from the global registry of acute coronary events (GRACE) , 2003, Heart.

[5]  J. Boura,et al.  Primary angioplasty versus intravenous thrombolytic therapy for acute myocardial infarction: a quantitative review of 23 randomised trials , 2003, The Lancet.

[6]  Carl J Pepine,et al.  ACC/AHA 2002 guideline update for the management of patients with unstable angina and non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction--summary article: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association task force on practice guidelines (Committee on the Management of Patients , 2002, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[7]  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.

[8]  Á. Avezum,et al.  Practice variation and missed opportunities for reperfusion in ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction: findings from the Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events (GRACE) , 2002, The Lancet.

[9]  A. Mattioli,et al.  Collaborative meta-analysis of randomised trials of antiplatelet therapy for prevention of death, myocardial infarction, and stroke in high risk patients , 2002, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[10]  R. Califf,et al.  Platelet glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors in acute coronary syndromes: a meta-analysis of all major randomised clinical trials , 2002, The Lancet.

[11]  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.

[12]  A. Siegbahn,et al.  Markers of myocardial damage and inflammation in relation to long-term mortality in unstable coronary artery disease. FRISC Study Group. Fragmin during Instability in Coronary Artery Disease. , 2000, The New England journal of medicine.

[13]  Hugo A. Katus,et al.  Myocardial infarction redefined--a consensus document of The Joint European Society of Cardiology/American College of Cardiology Committee for the redefinition of myocardial infarction. , 2000, European heart journal.

[14]  L. Wallentin,et al.  Outcome at 1 year after an invasive compared with a non-invasive strategy in unstable coronary-artery disease: the FRISC II invasive randomised trial , 2000, The Lancet.

[15]  R. Collins,et al.  Aspirin, heparin, and fibrinolytic therapy in suspected acute myocardial infarction. , 1997, New England Journal of Medicine.

[16]  E. Falk,et al.  Management of acute myocardial infarction in patients presenting with ST-segment elevation. The Task Force on the Management of Acute Myocardial Infarction of the European Society of Cardiology. , 2003, European heart journal.

[17]  G. Specchia,et al.  Management of acute coronary syndromes in patients presenting without persistent ST-segment elevation. , 2002, European heart journal.

[18]  P. R. R. Ecurrent,et al.  EFFECTS OF CLOPIDOGREL IN ADDITION TO ASPIRIN IN PATIENTS WITH ACUTE CORONARY SYNDROMES WITHOUT ST-SEGMENT ELEVATION , 2001 .

[19]  Eorge,et al.  CARDIAC-SPECIFIC TROPONIN I LEVELS TO PREDICT THE RISK OF MORTALITY IN PATIENTS WITH ACUTE CORONARY SYNDROMES , 2000 .