• Shailja V Parikh, James A de Lemos, Michael E Jessen, Emmanouil S Brilakis, E Magnus Ohman, Anita Y Chen, Tracy Y Wang, Eric D Peterson, Matthew T Roe, Elizabeth M Holper, and CRUSADE and ACTION Registry-GWTG Participants.
• Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Cardiology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas 75235, USA.
• JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2010 Apr 1;3(4):419-27.

ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to examine timing of in-hospital coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG) for non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) patients.BackgroundAlthough practice guidelines recommend delaying CABG for a few days after presentation for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction patients, current guidelines for NSTEMI patients do not address optimal CABG timing.MethodsWe evaluated rates and timing of in-hospital CABG among NSTEMI patients treated at U.S. hospitals from 2002 to 2008 with the CRUSADE (Can Rapid Risk Stratification of Unstable Angina Patients Suppress Adverse Outcomes with Early Implementation of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Guidelines) (January 2002 to December 2006) and ACTION Registry-GWTG (Acute Coronary Treatment and Intervention Outcomes Network Registry-Get With The Guidelines) (January 2007 to June 2008) programs. Analyses designed to study the clinical characteristics and outcomes of early (48 h, n = 1,822) CABG focused upon more recent NSTEMI patients from the ACTION Registry-GWTG.ResultsBoth the rate (11% to 13%) and timing (30% early and 70% late) of in-hospital CABG remained consistent from 2002 to 2008. In the ACTION Registry-GWTG program, NSTEMI patients undergoing late CABG tended to have a higher risk profile than those undergoing early CABG. In-hospital mortality (3.6% vs. 3.8%, adjusted odds ratio: 1.12, 95% confidence interval: 0.71 to 1.78) and the composite outcome of death, myocardial infarction, congestive heart failure, or cardiogenic shock (12.6% vs. 12.4%, adjusted odds ratio: 0.94, 95% confidence interval: 0.69 to 1.28) were similar between patients undergoing early versus late CABG.ConclusionsMost NSTEMI patients undergo late CABG after hospital arrival. Although these patients have higher-risk clinical characteristics, they have the same risk of adverse clinical outcomes compared with patients who undergo early CABG. Thus, delaying CABG routinely after NSTEMI might increase resource use without improving outcomes. Additionally, the timing of CABG for NSTEMI patients might be appropriately determined by clinicians to minimize the risk of adverse clinical events.Copyright (c) 2010 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

42 keywords...

hide…