Online first
Original Article
Published online: 2024-10-24

open access

Page views 86
Article views/downloads 45
Get Citation

Connect on Social Media

Connect on Social Media

A comparison of the management and five-year outcomes of patients treated for chronic coronary syndrome between 2006–2007 and 2015–2016 — insights from the PRESAGE registry

Izabela Kozłowska-Karaca1, Piotr Desperak2, Mariusz Gąsior3, Przemysław Trzeciak3

Abstract

Background: Changes in the management of patients with chronic coronary syndromes (CCS) require continuous monitoring of results of treatment in daily clinical practice.

The present study contains a comparison of the clinical characteristics, management, and in-hospital and five-year outcomes of patients with CCS enrolled on the Prospective REgistry of Stable AnGina management and trEatment (PRESAGE).

Methods: A group of 3475 patients with CCS were selected who underwent coronary angiography and were divided into two groups who were treated in the years 2006–2007 (1300 [37.4%]) – group I, and during 2015–2016 (2175 [62.6%] – group II). The composite endpoints involved death, non-fatal myocardial infarction (MI), and acute coronary syndrome-driven revascularization.

Results: Comparing patients from group I  to those from group II, group I were younger; 61.8 (54.9–68.5) vs. 66.1 (59.7–72.7) years respectively, with a higher incidence of previous MI and percutaneous intervention. Patients from the group II had a higher incidence of hypertension, diabetes, obesity, atrial fibrillation, New York Heart Association class III or more. The incidence of the composite endpoints did not vary significantly between the two groups during the entire period after the index hospitalization, but patients from the group I had a lower mortality rate both within three and five years after discharge (8.5% vs. 10.7, p = 0.03 and 13.2% vs. 17.9%, p < 0.001, respectively).

Conclusions: Patients treated during 2006–2007 and 2015–2016 differed in age, clinical characteristics, and comorbidities. The composite endpoint incidence was similar in both groups, but long-term mortality rates were higher in the 2015–2016 cohort.

Article available in PDF format

View PDF Download PDF file

References

  1. Hemingway H, McCallum A, Shipley M, et al. Incidence and prognostic implications of stable angina pectoris among women and men. JAMA. 2006; 295(12): 1404–1411.
  2. Pikala M, Maniecka-Bryła I, Pikala M, et al. Fifteen-year mortality trends due to cardiovascular diseases in Poland using standard expected years of life lost, 2000-2014. Kardiol Pol. 2017; 75(10): 1033–1040.
  3. Fox K, Garcia MA, Ardissino D, et al. Task Force on the Management of Stable Angina Pectoris of the European Society of Cardiology, ESC Committee for Practice Guidelines (CPG). Guidelines on the management of stable angina pectoris: executive summary: The Task Force on the Management of Stable Angina Pectoris of the European Society of Cardiology. Eur Heart J. 2006; 27(11): 1341–1381.
  4. Montalescot G, Sechtem U, Achenbach S, et al. Task Force Members, ESC Committee for Practice Guidelines, Document Reviewers. 2013 ESC guidelines on the management of stable coronary artery disease: the Task Force on the management of stable coronary artery disease of the European Society of Cardiology. Eur Heart J. 2013; 34(38): 2949–3003.
  5. Knuuti J, Wijns W, Saraste A, et al. ESC Scientific Document Group. 2019 ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of chronic coronary syndromes. Eur Heart J. 2020; 41(3): 407–477.
  6. Steg PG, Greenlaw N, Tendera M, et al. Prospective Observational Longitudinal Registry of Patients With Stable Coronary Artery Disease (CLARIFY) Investigators. Prevalence of anginal symptoms and myocardial ischemia and their effect on clinical outcomes in outpatients with stable coronary artery disease: data from the International Observational CLARIFY Registry. JAMA Intern Med. 2014; 174(10): 1651–1659.
  7. Sorbets E, Greenlaw N, Ferrari R, et al. CLARIFY Investigators. Rationale, design, and baseline characteristics of the CLARIFY registry of outpatients with stable coronary artery disease. Clin Cardiol. 2017; 40(10): 797–806.
  8. Parma Z, Steg PG, Greenlaw N, et al. Differences in outcomes in patients with stable coronary artery disease managed by cardiologists versus noncardiologists. Results from the international prospective CLARIFY registry. Pol Arch Intern Med. 2017; 127(2): 107–114.
  9. Daly CA, Clemens F, Sendon JLL. The Clinical Characteristics and Investigations Planned in Patients With Stable Angina Presenting to Cardiologists in Europe: From the Euro Heart Survey of Stable Angina. ACC Current Journal Review. 2005; 26(10): 996–1010.
  10. Komajda M, Weidinger F, Kerneis M, et al. EURObservational Research Programme: the Chronic Ischaemic Cardiovascular Disease Registry: Pilot phase (CICD-PILOT). Eur Heart J. 2016; 37(2): 152–160.
  11. Gąsior M, Pres D, Wojakowski W, et al. Causes of hospitalization and prognosis in pa-tients with cardiovascular diseases. Secular trends in the years 2006-2014 according to the SILesian CARDiovascular (SILCARD) database. Pol Arch Med Wewn. 2016; 126: 754–762.
  12. Trzeciak P, Desperak P, Ciślak A, et al. Clinical characteristics, and in-hospital and long-term outcomes of stable angina treatment in patients below and over 40 years of age (from the PRESAGE registry). Kardiol Pol. 2018; 76(1): 186–194.
  13. Steg PhG, Bhatt DL, Wilson PWF, et al. REACH Registry Investigators. One-year cardiovascular event rates in outpatients with atherothrombosis. JAMA. 2007; 297(11): 1197–1206.
  14. Bhatt D, Eagle K, Ohman E, et al. Comparative Determinants of 4-Year Cardiovascular Event Rates in Stable Outpatients at Risk of or With Atherothrombosis. JAMA. 2010; 304(12): 1350–1357.
  15. Management of stable angina pectoris. Recommendations of the Task Force of the European Society of Cardiology. Eur Heart J. 1997; 18(3): 394–413.
  16. Thygesen K, Alpert JS, White HD. Joint ESC/ACCF/AHA/WHF task force for the re-definition of myocardial infarction. Universal definition of myocardial infarction. Eur Heart J. 2007; 28: 2525–2538.
  17. Cutlip DE, Windecker S, Mehran R, et al. Academic Research Consortium. Clinical end points in coronary stent trials: a case for standardized definitions. Circulation. 2007; 115(17): 2344–2351.
  18. Thomsen HS, Morcos SK. Contrast media and the kidney: European Society of Urogenital Radiology (ESUR) guidelines. Br J Radiol. 2003; 76(908): 513–518.
  19. Denz R, Klaaßen-Mielke R, Timmesfeld N. A comparison of different methods to adjust survival curves for confounders. Stat Med. 2023; 42(10): 1461–1479.
  20. Braunwald E, Domanski MJ, Fowler SE, et al. PEACE Trial Investigators. Angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibition in stable coronary artery disease. N Engl J Med. 2004; 351(20): 2058–2068.
  21. Poole-Wilson P, Lubsen J, Kirwan BA, et al. Effect of long-acting nifedipine on mortality and cardiovascular morbidity in patients with stable angina requiring treatment (ACTION trial): randomised controlled trial. The Lancet. 2004; 364(9437): 849–857.
  22. LaRosa JC, Grundy SM, Waters DD, et al. Treating to New Targets (TNT) Investigators. Intensive lipid lowering with atorvastatin in patients with stable coronary disease. N Engl J Med. 2005; 352(14): 1425–1435.
  23. Acharjee S, Teo KK, Jacobs AK, et al. COURAGE Trial Research Group, COURAGE Trial Investigators, COURAGE Trial Research Group, COURAGE Trial Research Group. Optimal medical therapy with or without PCI for stable coronary disease. N Engl J Med. 2007; 356(15): 1503–1516.
  24. Maron DJ, Hochman JS, Reynolds HR, et al. Initial invasive or conservative strategy for stable coronary disease. N Engl J Med. 2020; 382: 1395–1407.
  25. De Luca L, Temporelli PL, Lucci D, et al. START Investigators. Current management and treatment of patients with stable coronary artery diseases presenting to cardiologists in different clinical contexts: A prospective, observational, nationwide study. Eur J Prev Cardiol. 2018; 25(1): 43–53.
  26. Steg PhG, Greenlaw N, Tardif JC, et al. CLARIFY Registry Investigators. Women and men with stable coronary artery disease have similar clinical outcomes: insights from the international prospective CLARIFY registry. Eur Heart J. 2012; 33(22): 2831–2840.
  27. Daly C, Clemens F, Lopez Sendon JL, et al. Euro Heart Survey Investigators. Gender differences in the management and clinical outcome of stable angina. Circulation. 2006; 113(4): 490–498.
  28. Duda-Pyszny D, Trzeciak P, Desperak P, et al. Comparison of clinical characteristics, in-hospital course, and 12-month prognosis in women and men with chronic coronary syndromes. Kardiol Pol. 2021; 79(4): 393–400.
  29. Spoon DB, Psaltis PJ, Singh M, et al. Trends in cause of death after percutaneous coronary intervention. Circulation. 2014; 129(12): 1286–1294.
  30. Wang EY, Dixson J, Schiller NB, et al. Causes and Predictors of Death in Patients With Coronary Heart Disease (from the Heart and Soul Study). Am J Cardiol. 2017; 119(1): 27–34.
  31. Bauters C, Tricot O, Meurice T, et al. CORONOR Investigators. Long-term risk and predictors of cardiovascular death in stable coronary artery disease: the CORONOR study. Coron Artery Dis. 2017; 28(8): 636–641.
  32. Steg PhG, Bhatt DL, Wilson PWF, et al. REACH Registry Investigators. One-year cardiovascular event rates in outpatients with atherothrombosis. JAMA. 2007; 297(11): 1197–1206.
  33. Revascularisation versus medical treatment in patients with stable coronary artery disease: network meta-analysis. BMJ. 2014: g4605.
  34. Neumann FJ, Sousa-Uva M, Ahlsson A, et al. ESC Scientific Document Group. 2018 ESC/EACTS Guidelines on myocardial revascularization. Eur Heart J. 2019; 40(2): 87–165.