Optimal timing of invasive angiography in stable non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction: the Leipzig Immediate versus early and late PercutaneouS coronary Intervention triAl in NSTEMI (LIPSIA-NSTEMI Trial)
Open Access
- 21 November 2011
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Oxford University Press (OUP) in European Heart Journal
- Vol. 33 (16), 2035-2043
- https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehr418
Abstract
The optimal timing of intervention in non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) remains uncertain. The aim of this multicentre trial was to assess whether an immediate invasive approach is superior to an early invasive or a selective invasive approach with respect to reduction of large infarction. Patients with NSTEMI were randomized to either an immediate (n= 201), an early (10–48 h after randomization; n= 200), or a selective invasive approach with high invasive percentage (n= 201). The primary outcome was the peak creatine kinase (CK)-myocardial band (MB) activity during index hospitalization; key secondary clinical endpoints were the composite of (i) death and non-fatal infarction; (ii) death, non-fatal infarction, and refractory ischaemia; (iii) death, non-fatal infarction, refractory ischaemia, and rehospitalization for unstable angina within 6 months. The median time from randomization to angiography was 1.1 h in the immediate vs. 18.6 h in the early and 67.2 h in the selective invasive group (P< 0.001). There was no significant difference in the peak CK-MB activity between groups. The key secondary clinical endpoints were similar between groups at 6-month follow-up: death and infarction: 21.0 vs. 16.0 vs. 14.5%; P= 0.17; death, infarction, refractory ischaemia: 20.9 vs. 21.5 vs. 22.0%; P= 0.98; death, infarction, refractory ischaemia, rehospitalization: 26.0 vs. 26.5 vs. 24.5%; P= 0.91, respectively. In NSTEMI patients, an immediate invasive approach does not offer an advantage over an early or a selective invasive approach with respect to large myocardial infarctions as defined by peak CK-MB levels, which is supported by similar clinical outcomes. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00402675This publication has 22 references indexed in Scilit:
- Long-Term Outcome of a Routine Versus Selective Invasive Strategy in Patients With Non–ST-Segment Elevation Acute Coronary Syndrome: A Meta-Analysis of Individual Patient DataJournal of the American College of Cardiology, 2010
- 2009 Focused Updates: ACC/AHA Guidelines for the Management of Patients With ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction (Updating the 2004 Guideline and 2007 Focused Update) and ACC/AHA/SCAI Guidelines on Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (Updating the 2005 Guideline and 2007 Focused Update)Circulation, 2009
- Immediate vs Delayed Intervention for Acute Coronary SyndromesJama-Journal Of The American Medical Association, 2009
- Early versus Delayed Invasive Intervention in Acute Coronary SyndromesThe New England Journal of Medicine, 2009
- Immediate versus deferred coronary angioplasty in non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromesHeart, 2008
- ACC/AHA 2007 Guidelines for the Management of Patients With Unstable Angina/Non–ST-Elevation Myocardial InfarctionCirculation, 2007
- Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes: The Task Force for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Non-ST-Segment Elevation Acute Coronary Syndromes of the European Society of CardiologyEuropean Heart Journal, 2007
- Benefit of Early Invasive Therapy in Acute Coronary Syndromes: A Meta-Analysis of Contemporary Randomized Clinical TrialsJournal of the American College of Cardiology, 2006
- Routine vs Selective Invasive Strategies in Patients With Acute Coronary SyndromesJama-Journal Of The American Medical Association, 2005
- A comparison of two invasive strategies in patients with non-ST elevation acute coronary syndromes: results of the Early or Late Intervention in unStable Angina (ELISA) pilot study 2b/3a upstream therapy and acute coronary syndromesEuropean Heart Journal, 2003