Optimal Intervention Timing for NSTEMI with No Antiaggregant Pre-Treatment

Patients undergoing non-ST elevation MI (NSTEMI) who are not pre-treated with P2Y12 receptor inhibitors will benefit from a very early intervention strategy. 

Momento ideal para intervenir infartos sin ST y sin carga de antiagregantes

The optimal intervention timing for NSTEMI patients is still under debate, despite multiple studies, but the ideal timing had never been tested in patients with no platelet aggregation inhibitor pretreatment. 

After the surge of new antiaggregants, more powerful and effective (basically ticagrelor and prasugrel), also came the possibility of loading patients, according to coronary anatomy, to prevent excessive bleeding in those who needed surgical intervention. 

741 moderate or high risk NSTEMI patients intended for an invasive strategy were randomized prospectively and openly to a delayed invasive strategy (n=363) with angiography between 12 hrs. and 72 hrs., vs very early invasive strategy (n=346) with angiography within 2 hrs. of medical contact. 


Read also: Multiple vs. Culprit vessel MI in Cardiogenic Shock: Anything New?


No patients received platelet antiaggregation before identifying their anatomy. Primary end point was a composite of cardiovascular death and repeat ischemic events at one month. 

Over 90% of patients of both groups were high risk NSTEMI. Mean time between randomization and angiography for the very early strategy was less than one hour (0 to 1 hour) and for the delayed strategy was mean 18 hrs. (11 hrs. to 23 hrs.).

Primary end point resulted significantly lower in patients receiving a very early invasive strategy (4.4% vs 21.3%; p<0.001), driven mainly by a reduction in repeat ischemic events (2.9% vs 19.8%; p<0.001).


Read also: Compare-Acute Sub-Study: Natural History of Non-Culprit Lesions in MI.


There were no differences in cardiovascular mortality.

Conclusion

With no antiaggregation pretreatment, patients undergoing NSTEMI were favored by a very early invasive strategy, significantly reducing repeat ischemia while waiting for the coronary angiography. 

Original Title: Optimal Timing of Intervention in NSTE-ACS Without Pre-Treatment The EARLY Randomized Trial.

Reference: Gilles Lemesle et al. J Am Coll Cardiol Intv 2020;13:907–17.


Subscribe to our weekly newsletter

Get the latest scientific articles on interventional cardiology

We are interested in your opinion. Please, leave your comments, thoughts, questions, etc., below. They will be most welcome.

More articles by this author

Coronary Perforations and Use of Covered Stents: Safe and Effective Long-Term Strategy?

Coronary perforations remain one of the most serious complications of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), especially in cases of Ellis ruptures type III. In these...

Left Main Coronary Artery Disease: Intravascular Imaging-Guided PCI vs. Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting

Multiple randomized clinical trials have demonstrated superior outcomes with coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) vs. percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with left main...

AHA 2025 | OPTIMA-AF: 1 Month vs. 12 Months of Dual Therapy (DOAC + P2Y12) After PCI in Atrial Fibrillation

Concomitant atrial fibrillation (AF) and coronary artery disease is a common occurrence in clinical practice. In these patients, current guidelines recommend 1 month of...

AHA 2025 | OCEAN Study: Anticoagulation vs. Antiplatelet Therapy After Successful Atrial Fibrillation Ablation

After a successful atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation, the need to maintain long-term anticoagulation (AC) remains uncertain, especially considering the very low residual embolic risk...

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Related Articles

SOLACI Sessionsspot_img

Recent Articles

Coronary Perforations and Use of Covered Stents: Safe and Effective Long-Term Strategy?

Coronary perforations remain one of the most serious complications of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), especially in cases of Ellis ruptures type III. In these...

Is it really necessary to monitor all patients after TAVR?

Conduction disorders (CD) after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) are a frequent complication and may lead to the need for permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI)....

Is it really necessary to monitor all patients after TAVR?

Conduction disorders (CD) after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) are a frequent complication and may lead to the need for permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI)....