doi: 10.1161/01.CIR.0000112577.69066.CB
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
(Circulation. 2004;109:745-749.)
© 2004 American Heart Association, Inc.
Clinical Investigation and Reports |
Impact of Combination Evidence-Based Medical Therapy on Mortality in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndromes
From the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Mich.
Correspondence to Debabrata Mukherjee, MD, Division of Cardiology, University of Michigan Health System, University Hospital, TC B1 226, 1500 E Medical Center Drive, Ann Arbor, MI 48103-0311. E-mail dmukherj{at}umich.edu
Received August 4, 2003; de novo received September 3, 2003; revision received October 16, 2003; accepted October 23, 2003.
 |
Abstract |
|---|
 Top Abstract IntroductionMethodsResultsDiscussionReferences |
|---|
Background— Several individual pharmacological agents, such as antiplatelet drugs, ß-blockers, ACE inhibitors, and lipid-lowering agents, have proven efficacy in reducing mortality in patients with acute coronary syndromes. However, the impact of the combination of these agents on clinical outcomes has not been studied before.
Methods and Results— A total of 1358 consecutive patients presenting with acute coronary syndromes between January 1999 and March 2002 were identified, and data on baseline demographics, comorbidities, and in-hospital management were collected. On the basis of discharge use of evidence-based therapies, we created a composite appropriateness score depending on the number of the drugs used divided by the number of the drugs potentially indicated for each patient. The impact of the composite score on 6-month mortality was analyzed using a risk-adjusted logistic regression model. The odds ratio for death for all indicated medications used (appropriateness level IV) versus none of the indicated medications used (appropriateness level 0) was 0.10 (95% CI, 0.03 to 0.42; P<0.0001); similarly, odds ratio for appropriateness level III versus level 0 was 0.17 (95% CI, 0.04 to 0.75; P=0.0018), odds ratio for appropriateness level II versus level 0 was 0.18 (95% CI, 0.04 to 0.77; P=0.01), and odds ratio for appropriateness level I versus level 0 was 0.36 (95% CI, 0.08 to 1.75; P=0.20).
Conclusions— Use of combination evidence-based medical therapies was independently and strongly associated with lower 6-month mortality in patients with acute coronary syndromes. Such therapies, most of which are generic and inexpensive today, seem to offer a marked survival advantage compared with patients in whom such therapies are omitted.
Key Words: coronary disease • mortality • survival • myocardial infarction
|
Introduction |
|---|
|
TopAbstractIntroductionMethodsResultsDiscussionReferences |
|---|
The term acute coronary syndrome (ACS) refers to a spectrum of acute severe cardiac disorders that include unstable angina, non–ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, and ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. These disorders are characterized by myocardial oxygen demand and supply mismatch, most often caused by atherosclerotic coronary artery disease. Patients presenting with ACS represent a major health problem, accounting for 2.5 million hospitalizations and 500 000 deaths annually in the United States alone. Of these, 1.5 million have a final diagnosis of unstable angina, and myocardial infarction (ST-segment and non–ST-segment elevation) accounts for the remaining 1 million.1
See p 698
We systematically assessed the discharge use of evidence-based medical therapy in consecutive patients admitted with ACS at our institution. Applying a point each to discharge use of antiplatelet agents, ß-blockers, ACE inhibitors, and lipid-lowering agents, we then created a composite appropriateness score. The impact of the composite score on 6-month mortality rate was ascertained by using a risk-adjusted logistic regression model.
|
Methods |
|---|
|
TopAbstractIntroductionMethodsResultsDiscussionReferences |
|---|
Patients
There were 1358 consecutive patients who were admitted to or discharged from inpatient services at the University of Michigan Medical Center from January 1, 1999, to March 11, 2002, with a diagnosis of unstable angina or acute myocardial infarction. All patients were identified by admission or discharge diagnoses; then, the charts were reviewed to screen for entry criteria. Inclusion in the study required 1 or more of the following: symptoms consistent with acute coronary insufficiency, electrocardiographic changes suggestive of ischemia, or elevation of cardiac biomarkers. A final diagnosis of myocardial infarction required elevation of creatine kinase–MB or troponin, as described in the American College of Cardiology (ACC) guidelines.2 Ninety-four patients had documented contraindications to ß-blocker or ACE inhibitor and were excluded from the analysis. The study cohort included the remaining 1264 patients. The institutional review board at the University of Michigan approved the study protocol, and all patients gave informed consent to participate.
Data Collected
Clinical, demographic, treatment, and outcome data were abstracted from medical charts by trained abstractors (cardiology fellows and cardiology research nurses). Definitions were based on those recommended by the ACC data standards committee.3 Demographic variables included age and gender. Comorbidities included smoking, diabetes, hyperlipidemia, hypertension, obesity, and prior history of heart disease (angina, heart failure, myocardial infarction, coronary artery bypass grafting, and percutaneous coronary intervention). ECG changes and initial laboratory data were recorded. Data describing patient management included use of ß-blockers, aspirin, ACE inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers, lipid-lowering agents, and percutaneous coronary interventions or coronary artery bypass grafting. Discharge medications, hospital length of stay, and number of days spent in the coronary care unit were recorded. Mortality data at 6-month follow-up were obtained for 100% of the patients from health system record review or phone call interview.
Appropriateness Algorithm
An appropriateness algorithm for the use of each of the various secondary pharmacological prevention strategies was created using evidence-based clinical practice guidelines from the ACC and the American Heart Association (AHA).4–7 Class I recommendations from ACC/AHA guidelines were used to develop the appropriateness algorithm. On the basis of this information, patients were considered candidates for lipid-lowering therapy if they had known hyperlipidemia. Hyperlipidemia was defined as meeting any of the following criteria: total cholesterol 
200 mg/dL, LDL 100 mg/dL, triglycerides 200 mg/dL, or past/present use of lipid-lowering agents.8 ACE inhibitors were judged indicated for patients with any of the following conditions: hypertension, heart failure, diabetes, or a documented ejection fraction (EF) <40%. All patients with ACS were considered candidates for antiplatelet therapy, ß-blockers, dietary modification, exercise training, and complete cessation from smoking. Patients with known contraindications to any of these agents, such as ACE inhibitors (intractable cough or angioedema) or ß-blockers (severe heart failure or worsening bronchospasm), were excluded from analysis. The percentage of patients undergoing appropriate evidence-based therapy among those considered eligible was then calculated at hospital discharge. For each patient, there were 4 possible recommended drugs: antiplatelet agents, lipid-lowering therapy, ACE inhibitors, and ß-blockers. A composite appropriateness score was calculated for each patient on the basis of the number of the drugs used at discharge divided by the number of the drugs indicated, expressed as a percentage. Composite appropriateness level was determined for each patient on the basis of the following algorithm: 0, none of the indicated medications used (score, 0); I, 1 medication used if 3 or 4 medications indicated (score, 25 or 33.3); II, 2 medications used if 3 or 4 medications indicated or 1 medication used if 2 medications indicated (score, 50 or 66.7); III, 3 medications used if 4 medications indicated (score, 75); and IV, all indicated medications were used (score, 100) (Table 1).
|
Statistical Analysis
Baseline characteristics were summarized by the use of frequencies and percentages for categorical factors and means and SD for continuous factors. A multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed for 6-month follow-up death in ACS patients with the composite appropriateness variable adjusted for age, gender, positive biomarker, new ST elevation, left ventricular ejection fraction, history of diabetes, renal failure, heart failure, and revascularization. The composite appropriateness for each patient was expressed as the composite appropriateness level from 0 to IV. Both a c-index (measure of model discrimination) and Hosmer-Lemeshow test (measure of model calibration) were used to determine the performance of the multivariate models. All analyses were performed using SAS version 8.2 (SAS Institute).
|
Results |
|---|
|
TopAbstractIntroductionMethodsResultsDiscussionReferences |
|---|
The baseline characteristics of the study cohort are shown in Table 2. The mean age was 63.7±13.3 years, and 63% were men. Comorbidities included a history of angina in 60.4%, prior myocardial infarction in 42.9%, a history of diabetes mellitus in 30.5%, hypertension in 66.8%, and hyperlipidemia in 60.6%. Approximately 15% presented with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, 55% with non–ST-elevation myocardial infarction, and 30% with unstable angina. Most patients were in Killip class I or II on presentation.
|
Two thirds of the patients underwent coronary angiography, and approximately 48% underwent either percutaneous or surgical coronary revascularization (Table 3). The use of antiplatelet medications at discharge was 
95%, use of ß-blockers was 82%, and, among appropriate patients, use of ACE inhibitors was 60% and lipid-lowering drugs were prescribed in 84% (Table 4).
|
|
The odds ratio for death for all indicated medications used (appropriateness level IV) versus none of the indicated medication used (appropriateness level 0) was 0.10 (95% CI, 0.03 to 0.42; P<0.0001); similarly, odds for mortality for appropriateness level III versus level 0 was 0.17 (95% CI, 0.04 to 0.75; P=0.0018), odds for appropriateness level II versus level 0 was 0.18 (95% CI, 0.04 to 0.77; P=0.019), and odds for appropriateness level I versus level 0 was 0.36 (95% CI, 0.08 to 1.75; P=0.20) (Table 5, Figure). Higher ejection fraction was associated with significantly better survival, and use of revascularization was associated with a strong trend toward improved survival. The c-index for the model was 0.84, suggesting excellent model discrimination, and the Hosmer-Lemeshow test statistic was 0.44, suggesting adequate model calibration and goodness of fit.
|
|
|
Discussion |
|---|
|
TopAbstractIntroductionMethodsResultsDiscussionReferences |
|---|
Cardiovascular disease remains the leading cause of morbidity and mortality in the United States.1 The past decade has seen a significant increase in pharmacological therapies with proven efficacy in reducing morbidity and mortality in patients with vascular diseases. These agents, including antiplatelet agents, statins, ß-blockers, and ACE inhibitors, are individually very effective in reducing secondary cardiovascular events. However, when prescribed together, they may be even more effective and may have incremental and even synergistic benefits in eligible patients.9 Despite strong and unequivocal benefits of these pharmacological agents, secondary preventive therapies continue to be underutilized.10 In the present study, we demonstrate that combination evidence-based medical therapy was independently and strongly associated with lower 6-month mortality in patients with ACS. On the basis of the number of appropriate agents used, there was a 72% to 87% reduction in mortality in these individuals. Evidence-based medical therapies, most of which are generic and inexpensive today, when used in combination may have a striking survival advantage. Our findings thus have significant clinical and health policy implications. Continuous quality-improvement initiatives, such as the ACS Guidelines Applied in Practice project,11 are particularly relevant to this concept, because the creation of effective care systems serves to maximize secondary prevention after ACS.
Multiple studies have demonstrated effectiveness of statin therapy in patients presenting with ACS.12–20 Statins not only lower lipids but also have salutary effects on platelet adhesion, thrombosis, endothelial function, inflammation, and plaque stability. The Heart Protection Study (HPS) has provided additional evidence for clinical benefits for a wide range of high-risk patients with coronary and vascular diseases.21 The Anglo-Scandinavian Cardiac Outcomes Trial (ASCOT) study22 randomized 19 342 patients with hypertension and at least 3 other cardiovascular risk factors to a combination of old (ß-blocker and diuretic) or new (ACE inhibitor and calcium antagonist) therapies. A total of 10 305 patients who were not undergoing cholesterol-lowering therapy and who had high cholesterol were then rerandomized, double-blind, to placebo or atorvastatin. There were 32 fewer strokes with atorvastatin therapy (1 less for every 1000 treated per year) in this study.22
Antiplatelet therapy has been demonstrated to be significantly beneficial in patients with ACS, with a survival advantage demonstrated with aspirin by the Antithrombotic Trialists Collaboration meta-analysis.23 Our study predates recent recommendations regarding dual antiplatelet therapy with clopidogrel, and most patients received aspirin monotherapy.
The Heart Outcomes Prevention Evaluation study demonstrated that ramipril, an ACE inhibitor, significantly reduced the rate of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, and stroke in patients at high risk of cardiovascular events.24 Ellis et al25 recently demonstrated benefit of ACE inhibitors in patients undergoing coronary stenting. One study has demonstrated that ACE inhibition reduces troponin release in non–ST-elevation ACS, perhaps mediated by the beneficial effects of ACE on vascular reactivity and the coagulation system.26 The EURopean trial On reduction of cardiac events with Perindopril in stable coronary Artery disease (EUROPA) demonstrated that among patients with stable coronary heart disease without apparent heart failure, perindopril can significantly improve outcome.27 Approximately 50 patients need to be treated for a period of 4 years to prevent 1 major cardiovascular event.27 Present ACC/AHA guidelines suggest that ACE inhibitors should be considered for secondary prevention for all patients with known coronary disease7 and offered to patients with clinical heart failure, left ventricular dysfunction, or ACS accompanied by hypertension.
ß-Blockers have been shown in many clinical trials to improve the survival rate of patients with recent ACS. These agents have also been shown in several large randomized trials to improve the survival rate and prevent stroke and heart failure in patients with coronary artery disease.28 In the Atenolol Silent Ischemia Trial (ASIST), patients with documented coronary disease and angina were treated with 100 mg of atenolol daily.29 After 1 year, fewer patients in the atenolol group experienced the combined end point of death, ventricular tachycardia and fibrillation, myocardial infarction, hospitalization, aggravation of angina, or revascularization.29 The atenolol-treated patients also had a longer time until their first adverse event. ß-Blockers are presently indicated in all patients with ACS in the absence of contraindications.30 The absolute cardiac contraindications for the use of ß-blockers are severe bradycardia, preexisting high-grade AV block, sick sinus syndrome, and severe, unstable heart failure (mild to moderate heart failure is actually an indication for ß-blockers). Asthma and bronchospasm are relative contraindications.
Thus, medications such as statins, antiplatelet agents, ß-blockers, and ACE inhibitors have been associated with significantly improved outcomes in patients presenting with ACS. However, data on the efficacy of these agents when used in combination in appropriately indicated patients are not available. In this study, we have shown significant synergistic effects of antiplatelet therapy, statins, ACE inhibitors, and ß-blockers when used together in patients with ACS. Combined treatment correlated with a striking survival advantage at just 6 months of follow-up. A recent hypothetical analysis using Markov modeling of a polypill strategy to simultaneously reduce 4 cardiovascular risk factors (low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, blood pressure, serum homocysteine, and platelet function) demonstrated that combination strategy may reduce cardiovascular disease by >80%.31 Our study also demonstrated a strong trend toward improved survival at 6 months with revascularization, consistent with the Fast Revascularization during InStability in Coronary artery disease-II (FRISC II) study, which demonstrated a survival advantage with revascularization at 2 years of follow-up.32
There are several potential limitations of our study. The appropriateness assessment for evidence-based therapy was based on ACC/AHA class I guidelines by retrospective review. If patients had previously experienced untoward reactions or contraindications to therapy, which was not documented, this may have been underrepresented with our sampling methodology. This might significantly overestimate the potential opportunity to improve secondary preventive measures.
Patients presenting with ACS represent an important high-risk cohort, where secondary vascular disease prevention is likely to be particularly effective and cost-effective. Clinicians have an opportunity to provide high-quality and appropriate evidence-based care to this high-risk cohort and to seize this opportunity in aggressively treating the underlying atherosclerotic process through lifestyle modifications and effective pharmacological therapies. However, despite strong and unequivocal benefits of these agents, secondary preventive therapies continue to be underutilized, as demonstrated in previous studies10,33 and in the present study. Attention to these disease-management opportunities has significant survival advantage in this high-risk cohort and underscores the importance of ACC- and AHA-initiated projects, such as the Guidelines Applied in Practice11 and the Get with the Guidelines program, to improve utilization of appropriate therapies.
|
References |
|---|
|
TopAbstractIntroductionMethodsResultsDiscussionReferences |
|---|
1. American Heart Association. 2002 Heart and Stroke Statistical Update. Dallas, Tex: American Heart Association; 2002.
2. Alpert JS, Thygesen K, Antman E, 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. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2000; 36: 959–969.
3. Cannon CP, Battler A, Brindis RG, et al. American College of Cardiology key data elements and definitions for measuring the clinical management and outcomes of patients with acute coronary syndromes. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2001; 38: 2114–2130.
4. Smith SC Jr, Blair SN, Bonow RO, et al. AHA/ACC Scientific Statement: AHA/ACC guidelines for preventing heart attack and death in patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease: 2001 update. Circulation. 2001; 104: 1577–1579.
5. Grundy SM, Pasternak R, Greenland P, et al. AHA/ACC scientific statement: assessment of cardiovascular risk by use of multiple-risk-factor assessment equations. A statement for healthcare professionals from the American Heart Association and the American College of Cardiology. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1999; 34: 1348–1359.
6. Ryan TJ, Antman EM, Brooks NH, et al. 1999 update: ACC/AHA Guidelines for the Management of Patients With Acute Myocardial Infarction. Executive Summary and Recommendations. Circulation. 1999; 100: 1016–1030.
7. Gibbons RJ, Abrams J, Chatterjee K, et al. ACC/AHA 2002 guideline update for the management of patients with chronic stable angina: summary article. Circulation. 2003; 107: 149–158.
8. Executive Summary of The Third Report of The National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) Expert Panel on Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Cholesterol in Adults (Adult Treatment Panel III). JAMA. 2001; 285: 2486–2497.
9. Mukherjee D, Lingam P, Chetcuti S, et al. Missed opportunities to treat atherosclerosis in patients undergoing peripheral vascular interventions: insights from the University of Michigan Peripheral Vascular Disease Quality Improvement Initiative (PVD-QI2). Circulation. 2002; 106: 1909–1912.
10. Vogel RA. Risk factor intervention and coronary artery disease: clinical strategies. Coron Artery Dis. 1995; 6: 466–471.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
11. Mehta RH, Montoye CK, Gallogly M, et al. Improving quality of care for acute myocardial infarction: the Guidelines Applied in Practice (GAP) Initiative. JAMA. 2002; 287: 1269–1276.
12. Aronow HD, Topol EJ, Roe MT, et al. Effect of lipid-lowering therapy on early mortality after acute coronary syndromes: an observational study. Lancet. 2001; 357: 1063–1068.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
13. Schwartz GG, Olsson AG, Ezekowitz MD, et al. Effects of atorvastatin on early recurrent ischemic events in acute coronary syndromes: the MIRACL study. A randomized controlled trial. JAMA. 2001; 285: 1711–1718.
14. Paradiso-Hardy FL, Gordon WL, Jackevicius CA, et al. The importance of in-hospital statin therapy for patients with acute coronary syndromes. Pharmacotherapy. 2003; 23: 506–513.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
15. Spin JM, Vagelos RH. Early use of statins in acute coronary syndromes. Curr Atheroscler Rep. 2003; 5: 44–51.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
16. Wright RS, Murphy JG, Bybee KA, et al. Statin lipid-lowering therapy for acute myocardial infarction and unstable angina: efficacy and mechanism of benefit. Mayo Clin Proc. 2002; 77: 1085–1092.
17. Jackevicius CA, Mamdani M, Tu JV. Adherence with statin therapy in elderly patients with and without acute coronary syndromes. JAMA. 2002; 288: 462–467.
18. Newby LK, Kristinsson A, Bhapkar MV, et al. Early statin initiation and outcomes in patients with acute coronary syndromes. JAMA. 2002; 287: 3087–3095.
19. Waters DD. Early pharmacologic intervention and plaque stability in acute coronary syndromes. Am J Cardiol. 2001; 88: 30K–36K.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
20. Marschner IC, Colquhoun D, Simes RJ, et al. Long-term risk stratification for survivors of acute coronary syndromes: results from the Long-term Intervention with Pravastatin in Ischemic Disease (LIPID) Study. LIPID Study Investigators. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2001; 38: 56–63.
21. MRC/BHF Heart Protection Study of cholesterol lowering with simvastatin in 20,536 high-risk individuals: a randomised placebo-controlled trial. Lancet. 2002; 360: 7–22.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
22. Cleland JG, Coletta AP, Nikitin N, et al. Update of clinical trials from the American College of Cardiology 2003. EPHESUS, SPORTIF-III, ASCOT, COMPANION, UK-PACE and T-wave alternans. Eur J Heart Fail. 2003; 5: 391–398.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
23. Collaborative meta-analysis of randomised trials of antiplatelet therapy for prevention of death, myocardial infarction, and stroke in high risk patients. BMJ. 2002; 324: 71–86.
24. Yusuf S, Sleight P, Pogue J, et al. Effects of an angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitor, ramipril, on cardiovascular events in high-risk patients: the Heart Outcomes Prevention Evaluation Study Investigators. N Engl J Med. 2000; 342: 145–153.
25. Ellis SG, Lincoff AM, Whitlow PL, et al. Evidence that angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor use diminishes the need for coronary revascularization after stenting. Am J Cardiol. 2002; 89: 937–940.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
26. Kennon S, Barakat K, Hitman GA, et al. Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibition is associated with reduced troponin release in non–ST-elevation acute coronary syndromes. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2001; 38: 724–728.
27. Fox KM. Efficacy of perindopril in reduction of cardiovascular events among patients with stable coronary artery disease: randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre trial (the EUROPA study). Lancet. 2003; 362: 782–788.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
28. Psaty BM, Smith NL, Siscovick DS, et al. Health outcomes associated with antihypertensive therapies used as first-line agents: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA. 1997; 277: 739–745.
29. Pepine CJ, Cohn PF, Deedwania PC, et al. Effects of treatment on outcome in mildly symptomatic patients with ischemia during daily life: the Atenolol Silent Ischemia Study (ASIST). Circulation. 1994; 90: 762–768.
30. Braunwald E, Antman EM, Beasley JW, et al. ACC/AHA guideline update for the management of patients with unstable angina and non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, 2002: summary article. Circulation. 2002; 106: 1893–1900.
31. Wald NJ, Law MR. A strategy to reduce cardiovascular disease by more than 80%. BMJ. 2003; 326: 1419–1424.
32. Lagerqvist B, Husted S, Kontny F, et al. A long-term perspective on the protective effects of an early invasive strategy in unstable coronary artery disease: two-year follow-up of the FRISC-II invasive study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2002; 40: 1902–1914.
33. Stafford RS, Radley DC. The underutilization of cardiac medications of proven benefit, 1990 to 2002. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2003; 41: 56–61.
Related Article:
Circulation 2004 109: 698-700.
This article has been cited by other articles:
 |
|
 |
|
  C. F M Weston Performance indicators in acute myocardial infarction: a proposal for the future assessment of good quality care Heart, November 1, 2008; 94(11): 1397 - 1401. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 K. M. Nielsen, O. Faergeman, A. Foldspang, and M. L. Larsen Cardiac rehabilitation: health characteristics and socio-economic status among those who do not attend Eur J Public Health, October 1, 2008; 18(5): 479 - 483. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 E. S. Chung, Lin Guo, D. E. Casey Jr, C. Bartone, S. Menon, S. Saghir, A. Mital, and D. J. Kereiakes Relationship of a Quality Measure Composite to Clinical Outcomes for Patients With Heart Failure American Journal of Medical Quality, June 1, 2008; 23(3): 168 - 175. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 M. Singh, J. White, D. Hasdai, P. K. Hodgson, P. B. Berger, E. J. Topol, R. M. Califf, and D. R. Holmes Jr Long-Term Outcome and its Predictors Among Patients With ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction Complicated by Shock: Insights From the GUSTO-I Trial J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., October 30, 2007; 50(18): 1752 - 1758. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 P. G. Steg Overview of large morbidity/mortality trials with ivabradine: focus on the BEAUTIfUL study Eur. Heart J. Suppl., September 1, 2007; 9(suppl_F): F15 - F19. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. L. Anderson, C. D. Adams, E. M. Antman, C. R. Bridges, R. M. Califf, D. E. Casey Jr, W. E. Chavey II, F. M. Fesmire, J. S. Hochman, T. N. Levin, 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 Patients With Unstable Angina/Non-ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction) Developed in Collaboration with the American College of Emergency Physicians, the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, and the Society of Thoracic Surgeons Endorsed by the American Association of Cardiovascular and Pulmonary Rehabilitation and the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., August 14, 2007; 50(7): e1 - e157. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 Authors/Task Force Members, J.-P. Bassand, C. W. Hamm, D. Ardissino, E. Boersma, A. Budaj, F. Fernandez-Aviles, K. A.A. Fox, D. Hasdai, E. M. Ohman, et al. Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes: The Task Force for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Non-ST-Segment Elevation Acute Coronary Syndromes of the European Society of Cardiology Eur. Heart J., July 1, 2007; 28(13): 1598 - 1660. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 P Wong, A Ramsewak, S Murray, A Robinson, D Robinson, and E Rodrigues Effects of comorbidity and hospital care on 6-month mortality in patients with elevated cardiac troponin T Postgrad. Med. J., May 1, 2007; 83(979): 332 - 337. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 A. Goyal, J. H. Alexander, G. E. Hafley, S. H. Graham, R. H. Mehta, M. J. Mack, R. K. Wolf, L. H. Cohn, N. T. Kouchoukos, R. A. Harrington, et al. Outcomes Associated With the Use of Secondary Prevention Medications After Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery Ann. Thorac. Surg., March 1, 2007; 83(3): 993 - 1001. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
N F Murphy, S Stewart, C L Hart, K MacIntyre, D Hole, and J J V McMurray A population study of the long-term consequences of Rose angina: 20-year follow-up of the Renfrew-Paisley study Heart, December 1, 2006; 92(12): 1739 - 1746. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M Heras, H Bueno, A Bardaji, A Fernandez-Ortiz, H Marti, J Marrugat, and on behalf of the DESCARTES Investigators Magnitude and consequences of undertreatment of high-risk patients with non-ST segment elevation acute coronary syndromes: insights from the DESCARTES Registry Heart, November 1, 2006; 92(11): 1571 - 1576. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
D. J. Kereiakes and E. M. Antman Clinical Guidelines and Practice: In Search of the Truth J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., September 19, 2006; 48(6): 1129 - 1135. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 J. Collinson, A. Bakhai, A. Taneja, D. Wang, and M.D. Flather Admission ECG predicts long-term outcome in acute coronary syndromes without ST elevation QJM, September 1, 2006; 99(9): 601 - 607. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
P. G. Steg and D. Tchetche Pharmacologic management of stable angina: role of ivabradine Eur. Heart J. Suppl., September 1, 2006; 8(suppl_D): D16 - D23. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 S. M. Jani, C. Montoye, R. Mehta, A. L. Riba, A. C. DeFranco, R. Parrish, S. Skorcz, P. L. Baker, J. Faul, B. Chen, et al. Sex Differences in the Application of Evidence-Based Therapies for the Treatment of Acute Myocardial Infarction: The American College of Cardiology's Guidelines Applied in Practice Projects in Michigan. Arch Intern Med, June 12, 2006; 166(11): 1164 - 1170. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
C. Daly, F. Clemens, J. L. Lopez-Sendon, L. Tavazzi, E. Boersma, N. Danchin, F. Delahaye, A. Gitt, D. Julian, D. Mulcahy, et al. The impact of guideline compliant medical therapy on clinical outcome in patients with stable angina: findings from the Euro Heart Survey of stable angina Eur. Heart J., June 1, 2006; 27(11): 1298 - 1304. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
P. Tricoci, M. T. Roe, J. Mulgund, L. K. Newby, S. C. Smith Jr, C. V. Pollack Jr, D. J. Fintel, C. P. Cannon, D. L. Bhatt, W. B. Gibler, et al. Clopidogrel to Treat Patients With Non-ST-Segment Elevation Acute Coronary Syndromes After Hospital Discharge. Arch Intern Med, April 10, 2006; 166(7): 806 - 811. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 L. K. Newby, N. M. Allen LaPointe, A. Y. Chen, J. M. Kramer, B. G. Hammill, E. R. DeLong, L. H. Muhlbaier, and R. M. Califf Long-Term Adherence to Evidence-Based Secondary Prevention Therapies in Coronary Artery Disease Circulation, January 17, 2006; 113(2): 203 - 212. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 K. W. Mahaffey, M. Cohen, J. Garg, E. Antman, N. S. Kleiman, S. G. Goodman, L. G. Berdan, C. J. Reist, A. Langer, H. D. White, et al. High-Risk Patients With Acute Coronary Syndromes Treated With Low-Molecular-Weight or Unfractionated Heparin: Outcomes at 6 Months and 1 Year in the SYNERGY Trial JAMA, November 23, 2005; 294(20): 2594 - 2600. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
W. A. Jaber, R. J. Lennon, V. Mathew, D. R. Holmes Jr, A. Lerman, and C. S. Rihal Application of Evidence-Based Medical Therapy Is Associated With Improved Outcomes After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention and Is a Valid Quality Indicator J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., October 18, 2005; 46(8): 1473 - 1478. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. F. Hernandez, E. J. Velazquez, S. D. Solomon, R. Kilaru, R. Diaz, C. M. O'Connor, G. Ertl, A. P. Maggioni, J.-L. Rouleau, W. van Gilst, et al. Left Ventricular Assessment in Myocardial Infarction: The VALIANT Registry Arch Intern Med, October 10, 2005; 165(18): 2162 - 2169. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
K. A. Eagle, C. K. Montoye, A. L. Riba, A. C. DeFranco, R. Parrish, S. Skorcz, P. L. Baker, J. Faul, S. M. Jani, B. Chen, et al. Guideline-Based Standardized Care Is Associated With Substantially Lower Mortality in Medicare Patients With Acute Myocardial Infarction: The American College of Cardiology's Guidelines Applied in Practice (GAP) Projects in Michigan J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., October 4, 2005; 46(7): 1242 - 1248. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. T. Roe, E. D. Peterson, Y. Li, C. V. Pollack Jr, R. H. Christenson, W. F. Peacock, F. M. Fesmire, L. K. Newby, R. L. Jesse, J. W. Hoekstra, et al. Relationship Between Risk Stratification by Cardiac Troponin Level and Adherence to Guidelines for Non-ST-Segment Elevation Acute Coronary Syndromes Arch Intern Med, September 12, 2005; 165(16): 1870 - 1876. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
R. P. Giugliano and E. Braunwald The Year in Non--ST-Segment Elevation Acute Coronary Syndromes J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., September 6, 2005; 46(5): 906 - 919. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
P. Gabriel Steg and D. Himbert Unmet medical needs and therapeutic opportunities in stable angina Eur. Heart J. Suppl., September 1, 2005; 7(suppl_H): H7 - H15. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. R. Le May, G. A. Wells, M. Labinaz, R. F. Davies, M. Turek, D. Leddy, J. Maloney, T. McKibbin, B. Quinn, R. S. Beanlands, et al. Combined Angioplasty and Pharmacological Intervention Versus Thrombolysis Alone in Acute Myocardial Infarction (CAPITAL AMI Study) J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., August 2, 2005; 46(3): 417 - 424. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. T. Roe, L. S. Parsons, C. V. Pollack Jr, J. G. Canto, H. V. Barron, N. R. Every, W. J. Rogers, E. D. Peterson, and for the National Registry of Myocardial Infarction Quality of Care by Classification of Myocardial Infarction: Treatment Patterns for ST-Segment Elevation vs Non-ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction Arch Intern Med, July 25, 2005; 165(14): 1630 - 1636. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
L. Baruch and R. A. Phillips Quality: The Need for Intelligent Efforts Arch Intern Med, July 11, 2005; 165(13): 1455 - 1456. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
D. Mukherjee Optimizing management of patients with coronary artery disease: how do we get there? Eur. Heart J., June 2, 2005; 26(12): 1147 - 1149. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
F. Schiele, N. Meneveau, M. F. Seronde, F. Caulfield, R. Fouche, G. Lassabe, D. Baborier, P. Legalery, J.-P. Bassand, and on behalf of the Reseau de Cardiologie de Franche Compliance with guidelines and 1-year mortality in patients with acute myocardial infarction: a prospective study Eur. Heart J., May 1, 2005; 26(9): 873 - 880. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
D Mukherjee, J Fang, E Kline-Rogers, R Otten, and K A Eagle Impact of combination evidence based medical treatment in patients with acute coronary syndromes in various TIMI risk groups Heart, March 1, 2005; 91(3): 381 - 382. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. S. Leon, B. A. Franklin, F. Costa, G. J. Balady, K. A. Berra, K. J. Stewart, P. D. Thompson, M. A. Williams, and M. S. Lauer Cardiac Rehabilitation and Secondary Prevention of Coronary Heart Disease: An American Heart Association Scientific Statement From the Council on Clinical Cardiology (Subcommittee on Exercise, Cardiac Rehabilitation, and Prevention) and the Council on Nutrition, Physical Activity, and Metabolism (Subcommittee on Physical Activity), in Collaboration With the American Association of Cardiovascular and Pulmonary Rehabilitation Circulation, January 25, 2005; 111(3): 369 - 376. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. J. Wolk, C. N. Bairey Merz, and P. D. Thompson President's page: The promise of prevention: So, why aren't all cardiologists "preventive"? J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., November 16, 2004; 44(10): 2082 - 2084. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
S. R. Kapadia and D. J. Moliterno Did we enjoy the debate but forget the patient? J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., August 18, 2004; 44(4): 775 - 777. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
G. Permanyer-Miralda, I. Ferreira, A. Ribera, D. Mukherjee, J. Fang, S. Chetcuti, M. Moscucci, E. Kline-Rogers, and K. A. Eagle Optimal Therapy for Acute Coronary Syndromes: The More the Better? * Response Circulation, August 3, 2004; 110(5): e52 - e52. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
D. J. Kereiakes and J. T. Willerson Doctors and Hospitals: Healthcare's Rubik's Cube Circulation, May 25, 2004; 109(20): 2381 - 2385. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
H. D. White and J. T. Willerson We Must Use the Knowledge That We Have to Treat Patients With Acute Coronary Syndromes Circulation, February 17, 2004; 109(6): 698 - 700. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||