British Cardiac Intervention Society Risk Assessment In Acute Coronary Syndromes Dr David Newby BHF Senior Lecturer in Cardiology Associate Director of.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Patient Oriented Therapy Non STE ACS
Advertisements

Risk stratification and medical management of NSTE-ACS (UA/NSTEMI )
Keith A A Fox Royal Infirmary & University of Edinburgh CURE and PCI-CURE.
Radial versus Femoral Randomized Investigation in ST Elevation Acute Coronary Syndrome the RIFLE STEACS study Enrico Romagnoli, MD PhD Principal investigators:
A Risk Score for Predicting Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery in Patients with Non-ST Elevation Acute Coronary Syndromes Sai Sadanandan, MD*; Christopher.
Management of Acute Myocardial Infarction Minimal Acceptable vs Optimal Care Hussien H. Rizk, MD Cairo University.
Stanford ACS Guidelines 2003 David P. Lee, M.D. John S. Schroeder, M.D. *Donald Schreiber, M.D. Division of Cardiovascular Medicine and *Department of.
Current and Future Perspectives on Acute Coronary Syndromes Paul W. Armstrong MD AMI Quebec Montreal October 1, 2010.
Optimal Management of ACS Invasive vs Conservative Strategy
Myocardial Infarction
Anterior Depressions Angiographic and Clinical Outcomes Among Patients with Acute Coronary Syndromes Presenting with Anterior ST-Segment Depressions C.
 Decide on the correct management of patients with acute coronary syndrome based on the findings of a clinical history, examination and relevant test.
ACUTE CORONARY SYNDORME EARLY RISK STRATIFICATION Sarah Jamison March 2003.
1 What is… ? Disparities Among Women in Acute Cardiac Care Frances Canet, MD Cath Conference Thursday, May 26, 2011.
Coronary Artery Disease Angina Pectoris Unstable Angina Variant Angina Joseph D. Lynch, MD.
Published in Circulation 2005 Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Versus Conservative Therapy in Nonacute Coronary Artery Disease: A Meta-Analysis Demosthenes.
‘Taxi Driver in Pain’ Tiara Gill Carrie Ross Mark Hambly.
Amr Hassan Mostafa, MD, FSCAI A. Professor of Cardiology Cairo University Cairo, Egypt Egypt Combat MI, March 24-25, Cairo Sheraton.
Prasugrel vs. Clopidogrel for Acute Coronary Syndromes Patients Managed without Revascularization — the TRILOGY ACS trial On behalf of the TRILOGY ACS.
RITA-3 Is this a benign lesion in a benign condition? Who Needs Angioplasty in 2008? Stable Angina Stable Angina Keith A A Fox Professor of Cardiology.
Silent Ischemia STABLE CAD
Impact of Drug-Eluting Stents on Revascularization Choices in Patients with Acute Coronary Syndromes and Multivessel Coronary Disease: Results from the.
TARGET and TACTICS Clinical Trial Commentary Dr Eric Topol Chairman and Professor, Department of Cardiology Director of the Joseph J Jacobs Center for.
“Challenging practice in non-ST segment elevation Acute Coronary Syndromes (ACS)” Professor Jennifer Adgey Royal Victoria Hospital, Belfast 26th January.
ACUTE CORONARY SYNDROMES Part I. Definition Acute coronary syndrome (ACS) describes a spectrum of clinical conditions ranging from ST segment elevation.
Acute Coronary Syndromes SIGN 93. MINAP Mortality after Acute Coronary Syndromes Cumulative: 13.6% Blue 10.6% Green 11.6% Red.
Acute Coronary Syndromes. Learning outcomes To understand the clinical spectrum of coronary disease To recognise different presentations of the disease.
Acute Coronary Syndrome David Aymond, MD. ACS Definition: Myocardial ischemia typically due to atherosclerotic plaque rupture  Coronary thrombosis ACS.
Acute Coronary Syndromes in West Hertfordshire Masood Khan.
TACTICS- TIMI 18 Treat Angina with Aggrastat TM and Determine Cost of Therapy with an Invasive or Conservative Strategy.
Atypical Presentations Patients older than 75: frequently no chest pain ECG in evolution (nonspecific ECG changes) Diabetic patients: commonly no chest.
Antiplatelet Interventions in Acute Coronary Syndromes.
Coronary Heart Disease (CHD) László Tornóci Inst. Pathophysiology Semmelweis University.
Cooling Off? Early Intervention? Very Early Intervention? Steve Holmberg Sussex Cardiac Centre.
Acute Coronary Syndromes Risk-Stratification Pathophysiology Diagnosis Initial Therapy Risk-Stratification Risk-Stratification Invasive vs Conservative.
Bangalore S, et al. β-Blocker use and clinical outcomes in stable outpatients with and without coronary artery disease. JAMA. 2012;308(13): ?
ADMIRALADMIRAL Abciximab before Direct Angioplasty and Stenting in Myocardial Infarction Regarding Acute and Long term follow-up ADMIRAL Study ADMIRAL.
FRagmin® and Fast Revascularization during InStablity in Coronary artery disease FRISC II.
Annual Patient Admissions for Acute Coronary Syndromes 1.4 MM Non-ST elevation ACS 0.6 MM ST-elevation MI ~ 2.0 MM patients admitted to CCU or telemetry.
Date of download: 5/27/2016 Copyright © The American College of Cardiology. All rights reserved. From: The thrombolysis in myocardial infarction risk score.
Invasive Versus Conservative Strategy in Patients Aged 80 years or Older with NSTEMI or Unstable Angina(After Eighty study) Nicolai Tegn, Michael Abdelnoor,
Acute Coronary Syndrome
Josephine Mak Waikato Cardiothoracic Unit Journal Club
Cardiac causes of cardiac arrest
Total Occlusion Study of Canada (TOSCA-2) Trial
Risk Stratification of Chest Pain: Best Practices
CORONARY ARTERY DISEASE
The European Society of Cardiology Presented by Dr. Bo Lagerqvist
The European Society of Cardiology Presented by Dr. Saman Rasoul
Unstable Angina and Non–ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction
Recurrent Angina: New Tools for an Old Problem
Prevalence of statin and beta-blocker use by clinical presentation
This series of slides highlights a report on a symposium at the European Society of Cardiology Congress held in Munich, Germany from August 28 to September.
European Heart Association Journal 2007 April
Invasive versus conservative treatment in unstable coronary syndromes
Preventive Angioplasty in Myocardial Infarction Trial
TIMI IIIA Protocol Design 391 Patients with Unstable Angina / NQWMI
The European Society of Cardiology Presented by RJ De Winter
Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events: GRACE
What oral antiplatelet therapy would you choose?
CT coronary angiography and coronary calcium scoring
Train-the-Trainer Cases
The following slides highlight a report on a presentation at the American College of Cardiology 2004, Scientific Sessions, in New Orleans, Louisiana on.
Train-the-Trainer Cases
Train-the-Trainer Cases
FFR guided deferral of PCI in patients with ACS and stable coronary artery disease (SCAD). FFR guided deferral of PCI in patients with ACS and stable coronary.
Cardiovascular Epidemiology and Epidemiological Modelling
Many post-MI patients are not receiving optimal therapy
Adjusted. ORs for outcomes by maintenance P2Y12 treatment
Presentation transcript:

British Cardiac Intervention Society Risk Assessment In Acute Coronary Syndromes Dr David Newby BHF Senior Lecturer in Cardiology Associate Director of Wellcome Trust Clinical Research Facility

Case 1 46 year old woman Family history of ischaemic heart disease, hypertension, smoker and hypercholesterolaemia No prior history of angina 3 episodes of chest pain 12 hours prior to admission Already taking aspirin and statin on admission ECG normal Troponin I 1.2 µg/L

Case 1 Commenced on medical therapy and settles Would you manage the patient with: (a). In-patient coronary angiography and revascularise (b). Conservative treatment and consider angiography/revascularisation if symptoms recur

Case 2 79 year old man Non-smoker, hypertension and no risk factors Chronic stable angina for 15 years with known single vessel disease (angiogram 10 years ago) One episode of rest pain prior to admission Not taking aspirin ECG - minor ST depression on admission Troponin I <0.1 µg/L

Case 2 Commenced on medical therapy and settles Would you manage the patient with: (a). In-patient coronary angiography and revascularise (b). Conservative treatment and consider angiography/revascularisation if symptoms recur

TIMI Risk Score Age ≥ 65 years ≥3 Risk factors for coronary artery disease Significant coronary stenosis ST Segment deviation Severe anginal symptoms (≥2 anginal events in last 24 hours) Prior aspirin use (within last 7 days) Elevated serum cardiac markers Antman et al. JAMA 2000;284:

TIMI Risk Score and Benefit with LMW Heparin

Case 1Case 2 Age ≥6501 ≥3 Risk factors for CAD10 Significant CAD01 ST Segment deviation01 Angina ≥2 times within 24 hrs10 Prior aspirin use10 Elevated cardiac markers10 Total TIMI Score43 14 Day Event Rate20%13% TIMI Risk Score

Other Risk Factors and Scores

Robust data on in-hospital & 6-month outcomes in over 12,000 patients in 14 different countries In well-characterized patients with ACS: –In-hospital to 6 month rates of: –death: ST-MI 12%, Non-ST-MI 13%, UA 8% –Stroke: 1.5 to 3% –Recurrent hospitalization for cardiac event: 17 to 20% Unselected patients reveal substantially higher event rates than those entered into recent trials A major challenge exists in the application of proven therapies to the full spectrum of patients with ACS GRACE Registry

SBP (per 20 mmHg increase) Initial serum creatinine Heart rate 30bpm Initial cardiac enzyme Age (per 10 yr) Killip class ST deviation Pre-hosp arrest – Multivariable Risk Model

Comparison of TIMI Risk Scores for Death: Antman Data Vs. GRACE Data /12345'6/7 TIMI Risk Score Antman GRACE Death Rate (%)

Outcome of “low-risk” patients with ACS Presentation with UA in the absence of dynamic ECG changes, no troponin elevation, no arrhythmia nor hypotension 6 month outcome: –16.6% readmission –8.7% revascularised –2.2% deaths –0.2% MI “Low-risk” is not no risk

FRISC II Study Wallentin et al. Lancet 2000;356:9-16.

RITA-3 Study Fox et al. Lancet 2002;360:

Meta-analysis of Intervention Trials

Who Should We Target For Invasive Intervention?

MEN ≥65 YEARS CHRONIC ANGINA NON-SMOKERS CHEST PAIN at REST (TROPONIN +VE) ST DEPRESSION FRISC II et al. Lancet 1999;354:

Case 1Case 2 Age Sex Smoking Angina > 3 months ST Segment deviation Elevated cardiac markers Day TIMI Event Rate20%13% Benefit from InterventionNoYes 6 Month Risk Reduction Based on FRISC Dataset

Risk Assessment In Acute Coronary Syndromes Evaluation of Treatment Benefit In Acute Coronary Syndromes

Single Vessel Disease Two Vessel Disease Three Vessel Disease 75% Left Main Stem 95% Left Main Stem Harzard Ratio Survival Benefits of Revascularisation

>85 Severity of Luminal Stenosis (%) Frequency (%) of 5 year Vessel Occlusion or Myocardial Infarction <50% 50-70% >70% 68% 18% 14% Severity of Underlying Luminal Stenosis in Patients with an Acute Myocardial Infarction Luminal Stenosis Frequency Degree of Stenosis in the Culprit Lesion of Acute Myocardial Infarction

Conclusions Risk scores need to be carefully applied Risk scores may be population dependent and not reflect ‘true life’ populations Low risk is not no risk High risk does not equate to most benefit from intervention Is the benefit of interventional strategies for acute coronary syndromes derived from revascularising patients with prior stable angina and prognostically significant disease?