Assessment and management of acute coronary syndromes (ACS): a Canadian perspective on current guideline-recommended treatment--part 1: non-ST-segment elevation ACS.

Despite the reduction of coronary heart disease mortality over the past 40 years, hospital admissions for acute coronary syndromes (ACS) continue to increase. The goal of this 2-part article is to review the issues at each stage of assessment and management of the ACS patient, and to propose an optimal treatment strategy for the individual patient in the context of the realities, culture, and delivery of healthcare in Canada. ACS patients are categorized as either ST segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) or non-ST-elevation ACS (NSTE-ACS). For the patients with NSTE-ACS, prevention of recurrent ischemic events is the primary goal. Assessment of risk for recurrent ischemic and bleeding events helps to determine the net benefit of early cardiac catheterization and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and intensive antiplatelet and anticoagulant treatment. Those with higher ischemic risk features should be considered for an early invasive strategy and receive both dual antiplatelet therapy and an anticoagulant at the time of first medical assessment. Patients without high-risk features could be considered for medical treatment and a selectively invasive strategy; with coronary angiography and revascularization only if high-risk features become apparent. Long-term vascular protection with lifestyle modification (especially smoking cessation), lipid lowering, blood pressure and glycemic control, and the use of renin angiotensin aldosterone system (RAAS) blockade to prevent recurrent ischemic events, is important in all patients with ACS.

Assessment and management of acute coronary syndromes (ACS): a Canadian perspective on current guideline-recommended treatment--part 2: ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction.

Acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) accounts for approximately 30% of all acute coronary syndromes (ACS). The high early mortality for patients with STEMI is largely due to the extent of the ischemic injury. However, immediate reperfusion either pharmacologically with fibrinolysis or mechanically by primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) limits the size of the infarction and reduces mortality. Reperfusion therapy by primary PCI reduces mortality and the risk of reinfarction, beyond the benefits achieved by fibrinolysis, especially when the primary PCI is initiated within 90 minutes of first medical contact. The use of adjuvant therapy with antiplatelet and anticoagulant agents is essential to enhance the results of reperfusion, and/or maintain vessel patency following either mode of reperfusion. This review discusses the assessment and management of the patient with an acute STEMI, using recommendations from the most recent American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association, European Society of Cardiology, and existing Canadian guidelines. It provides an updated perspective and critical appraisal with practical application of the recommendations within the Canadian Healthcare system.

Access to new cardiovascular therapies in Canadian hospitals: a national survey of the formulary process.

BACKGROUND: Access to new therapies in hospitals depends upon both clinical trial evidence and local Pharmacy and Therapeutics (P&T) committee approval. The process of formulary evaluation by P&T committees is not well-understood. OBJECTIVES: To describe the formulary decision-making process in Canadian hospitals for cardiovascular medications recently made available on the Canadian market. METHODS: Postal survey of hospital pharmacy directors in all Canadian hospitals with more than 50 beds. Target drugs included abciximab, enoxaparin, dalteparin, clopidogrel, eptifibatide and tirofiban. RESULTS: Of 428 surveys mailed, responses were received from 164 P&T committees representing 350 hospitals for an effective response rate of 82%. While physicians make up the largest proportion of committee membership, pharmacists play an influential role. Information most commonly cited as influencing formulary decisions included published clinical trials (97%), regional guidelines (90%), pharmacoeconomic data (84%), decisions at peer hospitals (73%) and local opinion leaders (60%). However, this information was often not required on formulary applications. Approval timelines varied widely for target medications but there were no regional, hospital or P&T committee characteristics that were independent predictors of early formulary application or approval. CONCLUSIONS: There is wide variability in the time taken for Canadian institutions to adopt new cardiovascular therapies, which is not explained by regional, hospital or P&T committee characteristics. Standardization of the formulary application and evaluation processes, including sharing of information amongst institutions, would lead to broader understanding of the applicable issues, more objectivity and improved efficiency.