Long-term risk stratification for survivors of acute coronary syndromes - Results from the long-term intervention with pravastatin in ischemic disease (LIPID) study

OBJECTIVES We developed a prognostic strategy for quantifying the long-term risk of coronary heart disease (CHD) events in survivors of acute coronary syndromes (ACS). BACKGROUND Strategies for quantifying long-term risk of CHD events have generally been confined to primary prevention settings. The Long-term Intervention with Pravastatin in Ischemic Disease (LIPID) study, which demonstrated that pravastatin reduces CHD events in ACS survivors with a broad range of cholesterol levels, enabled assessment of long-term prognosis in a secondary prevention setting. METHODS Based on outcomes in 8,557 patients in the LIPID study, a multivariate risk factor model was developed for prediction of CHD death or nonfatal myocardial infarction. Prognostic indexes were developed based on the model, and low-, medium-, high- and very high-risk groups were defined by categorizing the prognostic indexes. RESULTS In addition to pravastatin treatment, the independently significant risk factors included: total and high density lipoprotein cholesterol, age, gender, smoking status, qualifying ACS, prior coronary revascularization, diabetes mellitus, hypertension and prior stroke. Pravastatin reduced coronary event rates in each risk level, and the relative risk reduction did not vary significantly between risk levels. The predicted five-year coronary event rates ranged from 5% to 19% for those assigned pravastatin and from 6.4% to 23.6% fur those assigned placebo. CONCLUSIONS Long-term prognosis of ACS survivors varied substantially according to conventional risk factor profile. Pravastatin reduced coronary risk within all risk levels; however, absolute risk remained high in treated patients with unfavorable profiles. Our risk stratification strategy enables identification of ACS survivors who remain at very high risk despite statin therapy. CT Am Coil Cardiol 2001;38:56-63) (C) 2001 by the American College of Cardiology.

Clopidogrel: A CURE in acute coronary syndromes? (A Key Paper Evaluation)

The standard approach to preventing acute coronary syndromes (ACSs)has been to inhibit platelet aggregation with aspirin and to inhibit blood coagulation with low molecular-weight heparin (LMWH). Even with this combination there is still a substantial short and long-term cardiovascular risk. The Clopidogrel in Unstable angina to prevent Recurrent Events (CURE) trial [1] compared clopidogrel plus aspirin against aspirin alone in patients with ACSs. The clopidogrel regimen was a loading dose of 300 mg p.o. followed by 75 mg/day and the recommended dose of aspirin was 75 - 325 mg/day. The first primary outcome was a composite of death from cardiovascular causes, non-fatal myocardial infarction (MI) or stroke and this occurred significantly less often in the clopidogrel than the placebo group (9.3 vs. 11.4%). Although there were more clopidogrel patients with life-threatening bleeding (clopidogrel 2.2%, placebo 1.8%), this represented GI haemorrhages and bleeding at sites of arterial puncture rather than fatal bleeding. This trial suggests a role for clopidogrel in the long-term treatment of ACSs

Quality of care of patients hospitalized with acute coronary syndromes

Background: Measurement and improvement of quality of care is a priority issue in health care. Patients hospitalized with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) constitute a high-risk population whose care, if shown to be suboptimal on the basis of available research evidence, may benefit from quality improvement interventions. Aim: To evaluate the quality of in-hospital care for patients with ACS, using explicit quality indicators. Methods: Retrospective case note review was undertaken of 397 patients admitted to three teaching hospitals in Brisbane, Queensland, Australia, between 1 October 2000 and 17 April 2001. The main out-come measures were 12 process-of-care quality indicators, calculated as either: (i) the proportion of all patients who received specific interventions or (ii) the proportion of ideal patients who received -specific interventions (i.e. patients with clear indi-cations and lacking contraindications). Results: Quality indicators with values above 80% included: (i) patient selection for thrombolysis (100%) and discharge prescription of beta-blockers (84%), (ii) antiplatelet agents (94%) and (iii) lipid-lowering agents (82%). Indicators with values between 50% and 80% included: (i) timely per-formance of electrocardiogram (ECG) on admission (61%), (ii) early coronary angiography (75%), (iii) measurement of serum lipids (71%) and (iv) discharge prescription of angiotensin-converting-enzyme (ACE) inhibitors (73%). Indicators with values <50% included: (i) timely administration of thrombolysis (35%), (ii) non-invasive risk assessment (23%) and (ii) formal in-hospital and post-hospital cardiac rehabilitation (47% and 7%, respectively). Conclusion: There were delays in performing ECG and administering thrombolysis to patients who presented to emergency departments with ACS. Improvement is warranted in use of non-invasive procedures for identifying high-risk patients who may benefit from coronary revascularization as well as use of serum lipid measurements, ACE inhibitors and cardiac rehabilitation.

Optimising care of acute coronary syndromes in three Australian hospitals

Objective. To improve quality of in-hospital care of patients with acute coronary syndromes using a multifaceted quality improvement program. Design. Prospective, before and after study of the effects of quality improvement interventions between October 2000 and August 2002. Quality of care of patients admitted between 1 October 2000 and 16 April 2001 (baseline) was compared with that of those admitted between 15 February 2002 and 31 August 2002 (post-intervention). Setting. Three teaching hospitals in Brisbane, Australia. Study participants. Consecutive patients (n = 1594) admitted to hospital with acute coronary syndrome [mean age 68 years (SD 14 years); 65% males]. Interventions. Clinical guidelines, reminder tools, and educational interventions; 6-monthly performance feedback; pharmacist-mediated patient education program; and facilitation of multidisciplinary review of work practices. Main outcome measures. Changes in key quality indicators relating to timing of electrocardiogram (ECG) and thrombolysis in emergency departments, serum lipid measurement, prescription of adjunctive drugs, and secondary prevention. Results. Comparing post-intervention with baseline patients, increases occurred in the proportions of eligible patients: (i) undergoing timely ECG (70% versus 61%; P = 0.04); (ii) prescribed angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (70% versus 60%; P = 0.002) and lipid-lowering agents (77% versus 68%; P = 0.005); (iii) receiving cardiac counselling in hospital (57% versus 48%; P = 0.009); and (iv) referred to cardiac rehabilitation (17% versus 8%; P < 0.001). Conclusions. Multifaceted approaches can improve care processes for patients hospitalized with acute coronary syndromes. Care processes under direct clinician control changed more quickly than those reliant on complex system factors. Identifying and overcoming organizational impediments to quality improvement deserves greater attention.

Platelet nitric oxide responsiveness - A novel prognostic marker in acute coronary syndromes

Objectives - Nitric oxide (NO) is critically important in the regulation of vascular tone and the inhibition of platelet aggregation. We have shown previously that patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) or stable angina pectoris have impaired platelet responses to NO donors when compared with normal subjects. We tested the hypotheses that platelet hyporesponsiveness to NO is a predictor of (1) cardiovascular readmission and/or death and (2) all-cause mortality in patients with ACS (unstable angina pectoris or non-Q-wave myocardial infarction). Methods and Results - Patients (n = 51) with ACS had evaluation of platelet aggregation within 24 hours of coronary care unit admission using impedance aggregometry. Patients were categorized as having normal (>= 32% inhibition of ADP-induced aggregation with the NO donor sodium nitroprusside; 10 mu mol/L; n = 18) or impaired (>= 32% inhibition of ADP-induced aggregation; n = 33) NO responses. We then compared the incidence of cardiovascular readmission and death during a median of 7 years of follow-up in these 2 groups. Using a Cox proportional hazards model adjusting for age, sex, index event, postdischarge medical treatment, revascularization status, left ventricular systolic dysfunction, concurrent disease states, and cardiac risk factors, impaired NO responsiveness was associated with an increased risk of the combination of cardiovascular readmission and/or death (relative risk, 2.7; 95% CI, 1.03 to 7.10; P = 0.041) and all-cause mortality (relative risk, 6.3; 95% CI, 1.09 to 36.7; P = 0.033). Conclusions - Impaired platelet NO responsiveness is a novel, independent predictor of increased mortality and cardiovascular morbidity in patients with high-risk ACS.

Cost-effectiveness of cholesterol-lowering therapy with pravastatin in patients with previous acute coronary syndromes aged 65 to 74 years compared with younger patients: Results from the LIPID study

Background We compared cost-effectiveness of pravastatin in a placebo-controlled trial in 5500 younger (31-64 years) and 3514 older patients (65-74 years) with previous acute coronary syndromes. Methods Hospitalizations and long-term medication within the 6 years of the trial were estimated in all patients. Drug dosage, nursing home, and ambulatory care costs were estimated from substudies. Incremental costs per life saved of pravastatin relative to placebo were estimated from treatment effects and resource use. Results Over 6 years, pravastatin reduced all-cause mortality by 4.3% in the older patients and by 2.3% in the younger patients. Older patients assigned pravastatin had marginally lower cost of pravastatin and other medication over 6 years (A$4442 vs A$4637), but greater cost offsets (A$2061 vs. A$897) from lower rates of hospitalizations. The incremental cost per life saved with pravastatin was A$55500 in the old and A$167200 in the young. Assuming no treatment effect beyond the study period, the life expectancy to age 82 years of additional survivors was 9.1 years in the older and. 17.3 years in the younger. Estimated additional life-years saved from pravastatin therapy were 0.39 years for older and 0.40 years for younger patients. Incremental costs per life-year saved were A$7581 in the older and A$1.4944 in the younger, if discounted at 5% per annum. Conclusions Pravastatin therapy was more cost-effective among older than younger patients, because of their higher baseline risk and greater cost offsets, despite their shorter life expectancy.

Using a clinical pathway and education to reduce inappropriate prescribing of enoxaparin in patients with acute coronary syndromes: a controlled study

Aims: To evaluate efficacy of a pathway-based quality improvement intervention on appropriate prescribing of the low molecular weight heparin, enoxaparin, in patients with varying risk categories of acute coronary syndrome (ACS). Methods: Rates of enoxaparin use retrospectively evaluated before and after pathway implementation at an intervention hospital were compared to concurrent control patients at a control hospital; both were community hospitals in south-east Queensland. The study population was a group of randomly selected patients (n = 439) admitted to study hospitals with a discharge diagnosis of chest pain, angina, or myocardial infarction, and stratified into high, intermediate, low-risk ACS or non-cardiac chest pain: 146 intervention patients (September-November 2003), 147 historical controls (August-December 2001) at the intervention hospital; 146 concurrent controls (September-November 2003) at the control hospital. Interventions were active implementation of a user-modified clinical pathway coupled with an iterative education programme to medical staff versus passive distribution of a similar pathway without user modification or targeted education. Outcome measures were rates of appropriate enoxaparin use in high-risk ACS patients and rates of inappropriate use in intermediate and low-risk patients. Results: Appropriate use of enoxaparin in high-risk ACS patients was above 90% in all patient groups. Inappropriate use of enoxaparin was significantly reduced as a result of pathway use in intermediate risk (9% intervention patients vs 75% historical controls vs 45% concurrent controls) and low-risk patients (9% vs 62% vs 41%; P < 0.001 for all comparisons). Pathway use was associated with a 3.5-fold (95% CI: 1.3-9.1; P = 0.012) increase in appropriate use of enoxaparin across all patient groups. Conclusion: Active implementation of an acute chest pain pathway combined with continuous education reduced inappropriate use of enoxaparin in patients presenting with intermediate or low-risk ACS.