 |
|
"Cooling-Off" vs Immediate Revascularization for Patients With Acute Coronary Syndromes
|
|
| Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings. |
|
|
|
To the Editor: Dr Neumann and colleagues1 found that in patients with unstable coronary syndromes, those who had deferred catheter intervention for prolonged antithrombotic pretreatment ("cooling off") had somewhat worse outcomes than those who had immediate intervention accompanied by intense antiplatelet treatment.
I would appreciate it if the authors would provide additional details regarding the definitions and timing of nonfatal reinfarction. In particular, it is unclear how they decided whether to classify an infarction as an index event or as an end point. This seems especially problematic, as 67% of all patients had elevated levels of cardiac troponin T at presentation. It would be of interest to know how many patients in each group had elevated levels of creatine kinase and its MB isoenzyme at presentation. This is particularly important, as an end-point infarction was defined as "new Q waves in 2 or more contiguous electrocardiographic leads" in 11 of . . . [Full Text of this Article]
Shaun Goodman, MD, MSc
Canadian Heart Research Centre
Toronto, Ontario
RELATED ARTICLES
"Cooling-Off" vs Immediate Revascularization for Patients With Acute Coronary Syndromes—Reply
Franz-Josef Neumann, Adnan Kastrati, and Albert Schömig
JAMA. 2004;291(6):691-692.
EXTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Evaluation of Prolonged Antithrombotic Pretreatment ("Cooling-Off" Strategy) Before Intervention in Patients With Unstable Coronary Syndromes: A Randomized Controlled Trial
Franz-Josef Neumann, Adnan Kastrati, Gisela Pogatsa-Murray, Julinda Mehilli, Hildegard Bollwein, Hans-Peter Bestehorn, Claus Schmitt, Melchior Seyfarth, Josef Dirschinger, and Albert Schömig
JAMA. 2003;290(12):1593-1599.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
|
