RESUMO
OBJECTIVES: To assess differences in the clinical management of nonST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI), including in-hospital events, according to biological sex. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Prospective observational multicenter study of patients diagnosed with NSTEMI and atherosclerosis who underwent coronary angiography. RESULTS: We enrolled 1020 patients in April and May 2022; 240 (23.5%) were women. Women were older than men on average (72.6 vs 66.5 years, P .001), and more women were frail (17.1% vs 5.6%, P .001). No difference was observed in pretreatment with any P2Y12 inhibitor (prescribed in 68.8% of women vs 70.2% of men, P = .67); however, more women than men were prescribed clopidogrel (56% vs 44%, P = .009). Women prescribed clopidogrel were more often under the age of 75 years and not frail. Coronary angiography was performed within 24 hours less corooften in women (29.8% vs 36.9%, P = .03) even when high risk was recognized. Frailty was independently associated with deferring coronary angiography in the adjusted analysis; biological sex by itself was not related. The frequency and type of revascularization were the same in both sexes, and there were no differences in in-hospital cardiovascular events. CONCLUSION: Women were more often prescribed less potent antithrombotic therapy than men. Frailty, but not sex, correlated independently with deferral of coronary angiography. However, we detected no differences in the frequency of coronary revascularization or in-hospital events according to sex.
OBJETIVO: Evaluar las diferencias en el manejo clínico y eventos intrahospitalarios en una cohorte de pacientes con síndrome coronario agudo sin elevación del segmento ST (SCASEST) en función del sexo. METODO: Estudio observacional, prospectivo y multicéntrico que incluyó pacientes consecutivos con diagnóstico de SCASEST sometidos a coronariografía con enfermedad ateroesclerótica responsable. RESULTADOS: Entre abril y mayo de 2022 se incluyeron 1.020 pacientes; de ellos, 240 eran mujeres (23,5%). En comparación con los hombres, las mujeres fueron mayores (72,6 años vs 66,5 años; p 0,001) y más frágiles (17,1% vs 5,6%; p 0,001). No hubo diferencias en el pretratamiento con un inhibidor del receptor P2Y12 (68,8% vs 70,2%, p = 0,67), aunque las mujeres recibieron más pretratamiento con clopidogrel (56% vs 44%, p = 0,009), principalmente aquellas de edad 75 años y sin fragilidad. En las mujeres se realizaron menos coronariografías precoces (# 24 h) (29,8% vs 36,9%; p = 0,03) a pesar de presentar la misma indicación (criterios de alto riesgo). En el análisis ajustado, la fragilidad, pero no el sexo, se asoció de forma independiente con la realización de una coronariografía diferida. La tasa y el tipo de revascularización fue igual en ambos sexos, y no hubo diferencias en los eventos cardiovasculares intrahospitalarios. CONCLUSIONES: Las mujeres recibieron con mayor frecuencia un tratamiento antitrombótico menos potente. La fragilidad y no el sexo se asoció con la realización de coronariografía diferida. Sin embargo, no hubo diferencias en la tasa de revascularización coronaria ni en los eventos intrahospitalarios en función del sexo.
Assuntos
Fragilidade , Infarto do Miocárdio , Infarto do Miocárdio sem Supradesnível do Segmento ST , Masculino , Humanos , Feminino , Idoso , Inibidores da Agregação Plaquetária/uso terapêutico , Clopidogrel/uso terapêutico , Angiografia Coronária , Infarto do Miocárdio sem Supradesnível do Segmento ST/diagnóstico por imagem , Infarto do Miocárdio sem Supradesnível do Segmento ST/tratamento farmacológico , Infarto do Miocárdio/diagnóstico por imagem , Infarto do Miocárdio/tratamento farmacológico , PrescriçõesRESUMO
INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: The optimal timing of coronary angiography in patients admitted with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTEACS) as well as the need for pretreatment are controversial. The main objective of the IMPACT-TIMING-GO registry was to assess the proportion of patients undergoing an early invasive strategy (0-24hours) without dual antiplatelet therapy (no pretreatment strategy) in Spain. METHODS: This observational, prospective, and multicenter study included consecutive patients with NSTEACS who underwent coronary angiography that identified a culprit lesion. RESULTS: Between April and May 2022, we included 1021 patients diagnosed with NSTEACS, with a mean age of 67±12 years (23.6% women). A total of 87% of the patients were deemed at high risk (elevated troponin; electrocardiogram changes; GRACE score>140) but only 37.8% underwent an early invasive strategy, and 30.3% did not receive pretreatment. Overall, 13.6% of the patients underwent an early invasive strategy without pretreatment, while the most frequent strategy was a deferred angiography under antiplatelet pretreatment (46%). During admission, 9 patients (0.9%) died, while major bleeding occurred in 34 (3.3%). CONCLUSIONS: In Spain, only 13.6% of patients with NSTEACS undergoing coronary angiography received an early invasive strategy without pretreatment. The incidence of cardiovascular and severe bleeding events during admission was low.
Assuntos
Síndrome Coronariana Aguda , Angiografia Coronária , Idoso , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Síndrome Coronariana Aguda/terapia , Angiografia Coronária/efeitos adversos , Estudos Prospectivos , Espanha/epidemiologia , Inibidores da Agregação Plaquetária/efeitos adversos , Fatores de TempoRESUMO
Abstract Background: One-catheter strategy, based in multipurpose catheters, allows exploring both coronary arteries with a single catheter. This strategy could simplify coronary catheterization and reduce the volume of contrast administration, by reducing radial spasm. To date, observational studies showed greater benefits regarding contrast consumption and catheterization performance than controlled trials. The aim of this work is to perform the first systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials (RCT) to adequately quantify the benefits of one-catheter strategy, with multipurpose catheters, over conventional two-catheter strategy on contrast consumption, and catheterization performance. Methods: A search in PubMed, CINALH, and CENTRAL databases was conducted to identify randomized trials comparing one-catheter and two-catheter strategies. The primary outcome was volume of iodinated contrast administrated. Secondary endpoints, evaluating coronary catheterization performance included: arterial spasm, fluoroscopy time, and procedural time. Results: Five RCT were included for the final analysis, with a total of 1599 patients (802 patients with one-catheter strategy and 797 patients with two-catheter strategy). One-catheter strategy required less administration of radiological contrast (difference in means [DiM] [95% confidence interval (CI)]; −3.831 mL [−6.165 mL to −1.496 mL], p = 0.001) as compared to two-catheter strategy. Furthermore, less radial spasm (odds ratio [95% CI], 0.484 [0.363 to 0.644], p < 0.001) and less procedural time (DiM [95% CI], −72.471 s [−99.694 s to −45.249 s], p < 0.001) were observed in one-catheter strategy. No differences on fluoroscopy time were observed. Conclusions: One-catheter strategy induces a minimal reduction on radiological contrast administration but improves coronary catheterization performance by reducing arterial spasm and procedural time as compared to conventional two-catheter strategy.
Resumen Antecedentes: La estrategia de catéter único permite explorar ambas coronarias con un solo catéter. Nuestro objetivo es realizar la primera revisión sistemática y meta-análisis de ensayos clínicos aleatorizados para cuantificar adecuadamente los beneficios de la estrategia de catéter único, con catéteres multipropósito, sobre la estrategia convencional de dos catéteres. Métodos: Se realizó una búsqueda en PubMed, CINALH y CENTRAL, identificando ensayos aleatorizados que compararan estrategias de un catéter y dos catéteres. El resultado primario fue volumen de contraste administrado. Los secundarios, que evaluaron el rendimiento del cateterismo, incluyeron: espasmo radial, tiempo de fluoroscopia y de procedimiento. Resultados: Se incluyeron cinco ensayos, totalizando 1,599 pacientes (802 con estrategia de un catéter y 797 con estrategia de dos catéteres). La estrategia de catéter único requirió menos contraste (diferencia-de-medias; −3.831 mL [−6.165 mL a −1.496 mL], p = 0.001), presentando menos espasmo radial (odds ratio, 0.484 [0.363 a 0.644], p < 0.001) y menos tiempo de procedimiento (diferencia-de-medias; −72.471 s [−99.694 s a −45.249 s], p < 0.001). No hubo diferencias en el tiempo de fluoroscopia. Conclusiones: La estrategia de catéter único induce una reducción mínima en la administración de contraste, pero mejora el rendimiento del cateterismo al reducir el espasmo radial y el tiempo de procedimiento en comparación con la estrategia convencional.