Abstract Purpose Short-term outcomes have been well characterized in acute coronary syndromes; however, longer-term follow-up for the entire spectrum of these patients, including ST-segment-elevation ...myocardial infarction, non-ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction, and unstable angina, is more limited. Therefore, we describe the longer-term outcomes, procedures, and medication use in Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events (GRACE) hospital survivors undergoing 6-month and 2-year follow-up, and the performance of the discharge GRACE risk score in predicting 2-year mortality. Methods Between 1999 and 2007, 70,395 patients with a suspected acute coronary syndrome were enrolled. In 2004, 2-year prospective follow-up was undertaken in those with a discharge acute coronary syndrome diagnosis in 57 sites. Results From 2004 to 2007, 19,122 (87.2%) patients underwent follow-up; by 2 years postdischarge, 14.3% underwent angiography, 8.7% percutaneous coronary intervention, 2.0% coronary bypass surgery, and 24.2% were re-hospitalized. In patients with 2-year follow-up, acetylsalicylic acid (88.7%), beta-blocker (80.4%), renin-angiotensin system inhibitor (69.8%), and statin (80.2%) therapy was used. Heart failure occurred in 6.3%, (re)infarction in 4.4%, and death in 7.1%. Discharge-to-6-month GRACE risk score was highly predictive of all-cause mortality at 2 years (c-statistic 0.80). Conclusion In this large multinational cohort of acute coronary syndrome patients, there were important later adverse consequences, including frequent morbidity and mortality. These findings were seen in the context of additional coronary procedures and despite continued use of evidence-based therapies in a high proportion of patients. The discriminative accuracy of the GRACE risk score in hospital survivors for predicting longer-term mortality was maintained.
Summary Background Reduced muscular strength, as measured by grip strength, has been associated with an increased risk of all-cause and cardiovascular mortality. Grip strength is appealing as a ...simple, quick, and inexpensive means of stratifying an individual's risk of cardiovascular death. However, the prognostic value of grip strength with respect to the number and range of populations and confounders is unknown. The aim of this study was to assess the independent prognostic importance of grip strength measurement in socioculturally and economically diverse countries. Methods The Prospective Urban-Rural Epidemiology (PURE) study is a large, longitudinal population study done in 17 countries of varying incomes and sociocultural settings. We enrolled an unbiased sample of households, which were eligible if at least one household member was aged 35–70 years and if household members intended to stay at that address for another 4 years. Participants were assessed for grip strength, measured using a Jamar dynamometer. During a median follow-up of 4·0 years (IQR 2·9–5·1), we assessed all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, non-cardiovascular mortality, myocardial infarction, stroke, diabetes, cancer, pneumonia, hospital admission for pneumonia or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), hospital admission for any respiratory disease (including COPD, asthma, tuberculosis, and pneumonia), injury due to fall, and fracture. Study outcomes were adjudicated using source documents by a local investigator, and a subset were adjudicated centrally. Findings Between January, 2003, and December, 2009, a total of 142 861 participants were enrolled in the PURE study, of whom 139 691 with known vital status were included in the analysis. During a median follow-up of 4·0 years (IQR 2·9–5·1), 3379 (2%) of 139 691 participants died. After adjustment, the association between grip strength and each outcome, with the exceptions of cancer and hospital admission due to respiratory illness, was similar across country-income strata. Grip strength was inversely associated with all-cause mortality (hazard ratio per 5 kg reduction in grip strength 1·16, 95% CI 1·13–1·20; p<0·0001), cardiovascular mortality (1·17, 1·11–1·24; p<0·0001), non-cardiovascular mortality (1·17, 1·12–1·21; p<0·0001), myocardial infarction (1·07, 1·02–1·11; p=0·002), and stroke (1·09, 1·05–1·15; p<0·0001). Grip strength was a stronger predictor of all-cause and cardiovascular mortality than systolic blood pressure. We found no significant association between grip strength and incident diabetes, risk of hospital admission for pneumonia or COPD, injury from fall, or fracture. In high-income countries, the risk of cancer and grip strength were positively associated (0·916, 0·880–0·953; p<0·0001), but this association was not found in middle-income and low-income countries. Interpretation This study suggests that measurement of grip strength is a simple, inexpensive risk-stratifying method for all-cause death, cardiovascular death, and cardiovascular disease. Further research is needed to identify determinants of muscular strength and to test whether improvement in strength reduces mortality and cardiovascular disease. Funding Full funding sources listed at end of paper (see Acknowledgments).
We assessed the effect of previous peripheral arterial disease (PAD) and stroke on clinical outcomes in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and sought to ascertain the effectiveness of ...evidence-based therapies in these patients. We used data from the multinational Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events. Patients were enrolled at 102 hospitals in 13 countries between April 1999 and September 2005. Patients presenting with ACS were stratified according to the presence of previous PAD, stroke, PAD and stroke, or neither. In-hospital analysis included 48,418 patients and 6-month analysis included 32,735 patients. The primary end point was all-cause mortality and major adverse cardiac events during 6-month follow-up. Adverse in-hospital and 6-month events were lowest in patients with neither PAD nor stroke and highest in patients with PAD and stroke after adjustment for baseline demographics and co-morbidities. In-hospital mortality for the 4 groups (neither, PAD, stroke, PAD and stroke) was 4.5% versus 7.2% versus 8.9% versus 9.4% (p <0.001) and that for 6-month mortality was 3.9% versus 8.8% versus 9.3% versus 12%, and these differences persisted after accounting for differences in baseline characteristics. Use of evidence-based therapies was associated with significantly less morbidity and mortality in all ACS subgroups. In conclusion, outcomes after ACS are worse in patients with PAD or stroke, with the highest risk in patients with the 2 conditions and the use of evidence-based therapies are associated with improved outcomes in all ACS subgroups.
Summary Background Small trials have suggested that radial access for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) reduces vascular complications and bleeding compared with femoral access. We aimed to ...assess whether radial access was superior to femoral access in patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) who were undergoing coronary angiography with possible intervention. Methods The RadIal Vs femorAL access for coronary intervention (RIVAL) trial was a randomised, parallel group, multicentre trial. Patients with ACS were randomly assigned (1:1) by a 24 h computerised central automated voice response system to radial or femoral artery access. The primary outcome was a composite of death, myocardial infarction, stroke, or non-coronary artery bypass graft (non-CABG)-related major bleeding at 30 days. Key secondary outcomes were death, myocardial infarction, or stroke; and non-CABG-related major bleeding at 30 days. A masked central committee adjudicated the primary outcome, components of the primary outcome, and stent thrombosis. All other outcomes were as reported by the investigators. Patients and investigators were not masked to treatment allocation. Analyses were by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT01014273. Findings Between June 6, 2006, and Nov 3, 2010, 7021 patients were enrolled from 158 hospitals in 32 countries. 3507 patients were randomly assigned to radial access and 3514 to femoral access. The primary outcome occurred in 128 (3·7%) of 3507 patients in the radial access group compared with 139 (4·0%) of 3514 in the femoral access group (hazard ratio HR 0·92, 95% CI 0·72–1·17; p=0·50). Of the six prespecified subgroups, there was a significant interaction for the primary outcome with benefit for radial access in highest tertile volume radial centres (HR 0·49, 95% CI 0·28–0·87; p=0·015) and in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (0·60, 0·38–0·94; p=0·026). The rate of death, myocardial infarction, or stroke at 30 days was 112 (3·2%) of 3507 patients in the radial group compared with 114 (3·2%) of 3514 in the femoral group (HR 0·98, 95% CI 0·76–1·28; p=0·90). The rate of non-CABG-related major bleeding at 30 days was 24 (0·7%) of 3507 patients in the radial group compared with 33 (0·9%) of 3514 patients in the femoral group (HR 0·73, 95% CI 0·43–1·23; p=0·23). At 30 days, 42 of 3507 patients in the radial group had large haematoma compared with 106 of 3514 in the femoral group (HR 0·40, 95% CI 0·28–0·57; p<0·0001). Pseudoaneurysm needing closure occurred in seven of 3507 patients in the radial group compared with 23 of 3514 in the femoral group (HR 0·30, 95% CI 0·13–0·71; p=0·006). Interpretation Radial and femoral approaches are both safe and effective for PCI. However, the lower rate of local vascular complications may be a reason to use the radial approach. Funding Sanofi-Aventis, Population Health Research Institute, and Canadian Network for Trials Internationally (CANNeCTIN), an initiative of the Canadian Institutes of Health Research.
Summary Background Atrial fibrillation is an important cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide, but scant data are available for long-term outcomes in individuals outside North America or Europe, ...especially in primary care settings. Methods We did a cohort study using a prospective registry of patients in 47 countries who presented to a hospital emergency department with atrial fibrillation or atrial flutter as a primary or secondary diagnosis. 15 400 individuals were enrolled to determine the occurrence of death and strokes (the primary outcomes) in this cohort over eight geographical regions (North America, western Europe, and Australia; South America; eastern Europe; the Middle East and Mediterranean crescent; sub-Saharan Africa; India; China; and southeast Asia) 1 year after attending the emergency department. Patients from North America, western Europe, and Australia were used as the reference population, and compared with patients from the other seven regions Findings Between Dec 24, 2007, and Oct 21, 2011, we enrolled 15 400 individuals to the registry. Follow-up was complete for 15 361 (99·7%), of whom 1758 (11%) died within 1 year. Fewer deaths occurred among patients presenting to the emergency department with a primary diagnosis of atrial fibrillation compared with patients who had atrial fibrillation as a secondary diagnosis (377 6% of 6825 patients vs 1381 16% of 8536, p<0·0001). Twice as many patients had died by 1 year in South America (192 17% of 1132) and Africa (225 20% of 1137) compared with North America, western Europe, and Australia (366 10% of 3800, p<0·0001). Heart failure was the most common cause of death (519 30% of 1758); stroke caused 148 (8%) deaths. 604 (4%) of 15361 patients had had a stroke by 1 year; 170 (3%) of 6825 for whom atrial fibrillation was a primary diagnosis and 434 (5%) of 8536 for whom it was a secondary diagnosis (p<0·0001). The highest number of strokes occurred in patients in Africa (89 8% of 1137), China (143 7% of 2023), and southeast Asia (88 7% of 1331) and the lowest occurred in India (20 <1% of 2536). 94 (3%) of 3800 patients in North America, western Europe, and Australia had a stroke. Interpretation Marked unexplained inter-regional variations in the occurrence of stroke and mortality suggest that factors other than clinical variables might be important. Prevention of death from heart failure should be a major priority in the treatment of atrial fibrillation. Funding Boehringer Ingelheim.
Summary Background Although most cardiovascular disease occurs in low-income and middle-income countries, little is known about the use of effective secondary prevention medications in these ...communities. We aimed to assess use of proven effective secondary preventive drugs (antiplatelet drugs, β blockers, angiotensin-converting-enzyme ACE inhibitors or angiotensin-receptor blockers ARBs, and statins) in individuals with a history of coronary heart disease or stroke. Methods In the Prospective Urban Rural Epidemiological (PURE) study, we recruited individuals aged 35–70 years from rural and urban communities in countries at various stages of economic development. We assessed rates of previous cardiovascular disease (coronary heart disease or stroke) and use of proven effective secondary preventive drugs and blood-pressure-lowering drugs with standardised questionnaires, which were completed by telephone interviews, household visits, or on patient's presentation to clinics. We report estimates of drug use at national, community, and individual levels. Findings We enrolled 153 996 adults from 628 urban and rural communities in countries with incomes classified as high (three countries), upper-middle (seven), lower-middle (three), or low (four) between January, 2003, and December, 2009. 5650 participants had a self-reported coronary heart disease event (median 5·0 years previously IQR 2·0–10·0) and 2292 had stroke (4·0 years previously 2·0–8·0). Overall, few individuals with cardiovascular disease took antiplatelet drugs (25·3%), β blockers (17·4%), ACE inhibitors or ARBs (19·5%), or statins (14·6%). Use was highest in high-income countries (antiplatelet drugs 62·0%, β blockers 40·0%, ACE inhibitors or ARBs 49·8%, and statins 66·5%), lowest in low-income countries (8·8%, 9·7%, 5·2%, and 3·3%, respectively), and decreased in line with reduction of country economic status (ptrend <0·0001 for every drug type). Fewest patients received no drugs in high-income countries (11·2%), compared with 45·1% in upper middle-income countries, 69·3% in lower middle-income countries, and 80·2% in low-income countries. Drug use was higher in urban than rural areas (antiplatelet drugs 28·7% urban vs 21·3% rural, β blockers 23·5% vs 15·6%, ACE inhibitors or ARBs 22·8% vs 15·5%, and statins 19·9% vs 11·6%; all p<0·0001), with greatest variation in poorest countries (pinteraction <0·0001 for urban vs rural differences by country economic status). Country-level factors (eg, economic status) affected rates of drug use more than did individual-level factors (eg, age, sex, education, smoking status, body-mass index, and hypertension and diabetes statuses). Interpretation Because use of secondary prevention medications is low worldwide—especially in low-income countries and rural areas—systematic approaches are needed to improve the long-term use of basic, inexpensive, and effective drugs. Funding Full funding sources listed at end of paper (see Acknowledgments).
It is unclear if clinician risk stratification has changed with time. The aim of this study was to assess the temporal change in the concordance between patient presenting risk and the intensity of ...evidence-based therapies received for non–ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes over a 9-year period. Data from 3,562 patients with non–ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes enrolled in the Australian and New Zealand population of the Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events (GRACE) from 1999 to 2007 were analyzed. Patients were stratified to risk groups on the basis of the GRACE risk score for in-hospital mortality. Main outcome measures included in-hospital use of widely accepted evidence-based medications, investigations, and procedures. Invasive management was consistently higher in low-risk patients than in intermediate- or high-risk patients (coronary angiography 66.7% vs 63.5% vs 35.3%, p <0.001; percutaneous coronary intervention 31.1% vs 22.0% vs 12.9%, p <0.001). Absolute rates of angiography and percutaneous coronary intervention in the high-risk group remained 24% and 15% lower compared to the low-risk group in the most recent time period (2005 to 2007). In-hospital use of thienopyridine, low–molecular weight heparin, and glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors showed a similar inverse relation with risk. Prescription of aspirin, β blockers, statins, and angiotensin receptor blockers was inversely related to risk before 2004, although this inverse relation was no longer present in the most recent time period (2005 to 2007). Only in-hospital use of unfractionated heparin showed use concordant with patient risk status. In conclusion, despite an overall increase in the uptake of evidence-based therapies, most investigations and treatments are not targeted on the basis of patient risk. Clinician risk stratification remains suboptimal compared to objective measures of patient risk.
Summary Background Clopidogrel and aspirin are the most commonly used antiplatelet therapies for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). We assessed the effect of various clopidogrel and aspirin ...regimens in prevention of major cardiovascular events and stent thrombosis in patients undergoing PCI. Methods The CURRENT-OASIS 7 trial was undertaken in 597 centres in 39 countries. 25 086 individuals with acute coronary syndromes and intended early PCI were randomly assigned to double-dose (600 mg on day 1, 150 mg on days 2–7, then 75 mg daily) versus standard-dose (300 mg on day 1 then 75 mg daily) clopidogrel, and high-dose (300–325 mg daily) versus low-dose (75–100 mg daily) aspirin. Randomisation was done with a 24 h computerised central automated voice response system. The clopidogrel dose comparison was double-blind and the aspirin dose comparison was open label with blinded assessment of outcomes. This prespecified analysis is of the 17 263 individuals who underwent PCI. The primary outcome was cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke at 30 days. Analyses were by intention to treat, adjusted for propensity to undergo PCI. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT00335452. Findings 8560 patients were assigned to double-dose and 8703 to standard-dose clopidogrel (8558 and 8702 completed 30-day follow-up, respectively), and 8624 to high-dose and 8639 to low-dose aspirin (8622 and 8638 completed 30-day follow-up, respectively). Compared with the standard dose, double-dose clopidogrel reduced the rate of the primary outcome (330 events 3·9% vs 392 events 4·5%; adjusted hazard ratio 0·86, 95% CI 0·74–0·99, p=0·039) and definite stent thrombosis (58 0·7% vs 111 1·3%; 0·54 0·39–0·74, p=0·0001). High-dose and low-dose aspirin did not differ for the primary outcome (356 4·1% vs 366 4·2%; 0·98, 0·84–1·13, p=0·76). Major bleeding was more common with double-dose than with standard-dose clopidogrel (139 1·6% vs 99 1·1%; 1·41, 1·09–1·83, p=0·009) and did not differ between high-dose and low-dose aspirin (128 1·5% vs 110 1·3%; 1·18, 0·92–1·53, p=0·20). Interpretation In patients undergoing PCI for acute coronary syndromes, a 7-day double-dose clopidogrel regimen was associated with a reduction in cardiovascular events and stent thrombosis compared with the standard dose. Efficacy and safety did not differ between high-dose and low-dose aspirin. A double-dose clopidogrel regimen can be considered for all patients with acute coronary syndromes treated with an early invasive strategy and intended early PCI. Funding Sanofi-Aventis and Bristol-Myers Squibb.
Abstract Background Long-term aspirin prevents vascular events but is only modestly effective. Rivaroxaban alone or in combination with aspirin might be more effective than aspirin alone for vascular ...prevention in patients with stable coronary artery disease (CAD) or peripheral artery disease (PAD). Both rivaroxaban and aspirin increase upper gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding and this might be prevented by proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy. Methods COMPASS is a double-blind superiority trial comparing rivaroxaban 2.5mg twice-daily in combination with aspirin 100mg once-daily or rivaroxaban 5mg twice-daily versus aspirin 100mg once-daily for prevention of myocardial infarction, stroke, or cardiovascular death in patients with stable CAD or PAD. Patients not taking a PPI were also randomized, using a partial factorial design, to pantoprazole 40mg once-daily or placebo. The trial was designed to have at least 90% power to detect a 20% reduction in each of the rivaroxaban-treatment arms compared with aspirin and to detect a 50% reduction in upper GI complications with pantoprazole compared with placebo. Results Between February 2013 and May 2016, we recruited 27,395 participants from 602 centers in 33 countries; 17,603 participants were included in the pantoprazole versus placebo comparison. At baseline, mean age was 68.2years, 22.0% were female, 90.6% had CAD, and 27.3% had PAD. Conclusion COMPASS will provide information on the efficacy and safety of rivaroxaban, alone or in combination with aspirin, in the long-term management of patients with stable CAD or PAD, and on the efficacy and safety of pantoprazole in preventing upper GI complications in patients receiving antithrombotic therapy.
Background Clinical and subclinical (covert) stroke is a cause of cognitive loss and functional impairment. In the AVERROES trial, we performed serial brain magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans in ...a subgroup to explore the effect of apixaban, compared with aspirin, on clinical and covert brain infarction and on microbleeds in patients with atrial fibrillation. Methods We performed brain MRI (T1, T2, fluid-attenuated inversion recovery, and T2* gradient echo sequences) in 1,180 at baseline and in 931 participants at follow-up. Mean interval from baseline to follow-up MRI scans was 1.0 year. The primary outcome was a composite of clinical ischemic stroke and covert embolic pattern infarction (defined as infarction >1.5 cm, cortical-based infarction, or new multiterritory infarction). Secondary outcomes included new MRI-detected brain infarcts and microbleeds and change in white matter hyperintensities. Results Baseline MRI scans revealed brain infarct(s) in 26.2% and microbleed(s) in 10.5%. The rate of the primary outcomes was 2.0% in the apixaban group and 3.3% in the aspirin group (hazard ratio HR 0.55; 0.27-1.14) from baseline to follow-up MRI scan (mean duration of follow-up: 1 year). In those who completed baseline and follow-up MRI scans, the rate of new infarction detected on MRI was 2.5% in the apixaban group and 2.2% in the aspirin group (HR 1.09; 0.47-2.52), but new infarcts were smaller in the apixaban group ( P = .03). There was no difference in proportion with new microbleeds on follow-up MRI (HR 0.92; 0.53-1.60) between treatment groups. Conclusions Apixaban treatment was associated with a nonsignificant trend toward reduction in the composite of clinical ischemic stroke and covert embolic-pattern infarction and did not increase the number of microbleeds in patients with atrial fibrillation compared with aspirin.
PDF
