These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Predictors, cost, and outcomes of patients with acute coronary syndrome who receive optimal secondary prevention therapy: results from the antiplatelet treatment observational registries (APTOR).
    Author: Zeymer U, Berkenboom G, Coufal Z, Belger M, Sartral M, Norrbacka K, Bakhai A, APTOR investigators.
    Journal: Int J Cardiol; 2013 Dec 10; 170(2):239-45. PubMed ID: 24225199.
    Abstract:
    BACKGROUND: We sought to evaluate outcomes, costs of care, quality of life and predictors at 12 months in patients with an acute coronary syndrome (ACS) who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and evaluated use of optimal secondary prevention therapy, defined as use of aspirin and clopidogrel along with ≥ 3 of the following 4 therapies at both hospital discharge and at one-year post-PCI: statins, beta-blockers, ARB/ACE-inhibitors, and exercise or diet. METHODS: Data were from the prospective, observational APTOR study of 14 European countries from 2007 to 2009 (n=4184 patients). RESULTS: Optimal therapy was received in 43% of patients. Use of optimal therapy varied significantly by country. Diet or exercise at 1 year was more likely prescribed to the optimal cohort (34% vs 16%) as was dual antiplatelet therapy (99% vs 49%). Rates of CV event (3.1% vs 3.5%), bleeding (2.9% vs 2.8%) and mortality (0.9% vs 1.3%) at 1 year were similar between the optimal and non-optimal cohorts, respectively. Total costs were similar for both cohorts, but differences in post-discharge costs were observed (optimal: £1760 [£1682-£1844]; non-optimal: £1492 [£1434-£1554]), primarily due to post-discharge medication and resource use. CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, in this contemporary, European ACS-PCI registry, optimal therapy was low (<50%) overall, particularly for diet or exercise and dual antiplatelet therapy, highlighting a considerable gap between evidence-based guidelines and implementation of such treatments. Whether this gap reflects a missed opportunity to improve patient outcomes or whether it reflects appropriate deviation from guidelines by front-line clinicians requires further investigation.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]