Hadassah-Hebrew University
Medical Center
Jerusalem, Israel
Tel: +972 2 584 4520
Fax: +972 2 581 2754
E-mail address: drott{at}012.net.il
In a recent editorial, Dr Christopher P. Cannon reviewed the published studies comparing invasive with conservative treatment strategies in patients with non-ST elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS).1 He concluded that it has been very clearly shown that an early invasive approach to all patients with NSTE-ACS is beneficial.
Dr Cannon didn't mention the Invasive versus Conservative Treatment in Unstable Coronary Syndromes (ICTUS) trial. This study was presented at a Hot Line session at the European Society of Cardiology Congress 2004 in Munich, Germany. This study set out to determine whether an early invasive strategy was superior to a more selective strategy in 1200 patients presenting with NSTE-ACS.
Patients were randomly assigned to either an early invasive treatment strategy or a selective strategy. The early invasive strategy included angiography within 2448 h, percutaneous coronary intervention within 48 h, or coronary bypass surgery as soon as possible; the selective strategy included medical stabilization and angiography, and revascularization only with refractory angina or ischaemia on pre-discharge exercise testing.
Lead ICTUS investigator Robbert de Winter (University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands) reported that the primary composite endpoint of death, myocardial infarction, or ACS re-hospitalization at 1 year occurred similarly in both groups.
This important study implies that all patients with NSTE-ACS should undergo risk stratification assessment and only the high risk patients should promptly be treated invasively, since not all patients with NSTE-ACS would benefit from an early invasive approach.
References
|