The n e w e ng l a n d j o u r na l of m e dic i n e

Review Article

EdwardW. Campion, M.D., Editor

Acute Myocardial Infarction

JeffreyL. Anderson, M.D., and DavidA. Morrow, M.D.

A
cute myocardial infarction with or without ST-segment eleva- From the Intermountain Medical Center
tion (STEMI or non-STEMI) is a common cardiac emergency, with the poten- Heart Institute, University of Utah School
of Medicine, Salt Lake City (J.L.A.); and
tial for substantial morbidity and mortality. The management of acute myo- Brigham and Womens Hospital, Harvard
cardial infarction has improved dramatically over the past three decades and continues Medical School, Boston (D.A.M.). Ad-
to evolve. This review focuses on the initial presentation and in-hospital management dress reprint requests to Dr. Anderson at
Intermountain Medical Center Heart In-
of type 1 acute myocardial infarction. stitute, 5121 S. Cottonwood St., Salt Lake
City, UT 84107, or at jeffreyl.anderson@
imail.org.
Defini t ion a nd T y pe s
N Engl J Med 2017;376:2053-64.
Acute myocardial infarction is an event of myocardial necrosis caused by an unstable DOI: 10.1056/NEJMra1606915
Copyright 2017 Massachusetts Medical Society.
ischemic syndrome.1 In practice, the disorder is diagnosed and assessed on the basis
of clinical evaluation, the electrocardiogram (ECG), biochemical testing, invasive and
noninvasive imaging, and pathological evaluation.
Acute myocardial infarction is classified on the basis of the presence or absence
of ST-segment elevation on the ECG and is further classified into six types: infarc-
tion due to coronary atherothrombosis (type 1), infarction due to a supplydemand
mismatch that is not the result of acute atherothrombosis (type 2), infarction causing
sudden death without the opportunity for biomarker or ECG confirmation (type 3),
infarction related to a percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) (type 4a), infarction
related to thrombosis of a coronary stent (type 4b), and infarction related to coronary-
artery bypass grafting (CABG) (type 5).1

Epidemiol o gic Fe at ur e s
The epidemiologic characteristics of acute myocardial infarction have changed dra-
matically over the past three to four decades (see the Supplementary Appendix, avail-
able with the full text of this article at NEJM.org). Since 1987, the adjusted incidence
rate of hospitalization for acute myocardial infarction or fatal coronary artery dis-
ease in the United States has declined by 4 to 5% per year.2 Nevertheless, approxi-
mately 550,000 first episodes and 200,000 recurrent episodes of acute myocardial
infarction occur annually.2 Globally, ischemic heart disease has become the leading
contributor to the burden of disease as assessed on the basis of disability-adjusted
life-years.3 Concurrently, the global burden of cardiovascular disease and acute myo-
cardial infarction has shifted to low- and middle-income countries, where more
than 80% of deaths from cardiovascular disease worldwide now occur.3,4 Among
156,424 persons in 17 countries who were followed for an average of 4.1 years,5 the
risk-factor burden was directly related to income, with the highest burden of risk fac-
tors in high-income countries and the lowest burden in low-income countries. In
contrast, an inverse relationship with income was noted for rates of acute myocardial
infarction (1.92, 2.21, and 4.13 cases per 1000 person-years in high-, middle-, and
low-income countries, respectively; P<0.001 for trend). Mitigation of the high bur-
den of risk factors in higher-income countries was attributed to greater use of pre-

n engl j med 376;21nejm.org May 25, 2017 2053

The New England Journal of Medicine
Downloaded from nejm.org on May 24, 2017. For personal use only. No other uses without permission.
Copyright 2017 Massachusetts Medical Society. All rights reserved.
 The n e w e ng l a n d j o u r na l of m e dic i n e

ventive measures and revascularization proce- ble or probable acute coronary syndrome without
dures. ST-segment elevation,9 or nonischemic chest pain;
this addresses the first of six key management
decisions (Table1). Serial biomarker testing is per-
Pathobiol o gic Fe at ur e s
a nd R isk Fac t or s formed to subclassify an acute coronary syndrome
without ST-segment elevation as non-STEMI or
The usual initiating mechanism for acute myo- unstable angina.
cardial infarction is rupture or erosion of a vulner- Serial measurement of cardiac troponin levels
able, lipid-laden, atherosclerotic coronary plaque, is the preferred biomarker method for differen-
resulting in exposure of circulating blood to tiating non-STEMI from unstable angina and dis-
highly thrombogenic core and matrix materials in orders other than acute coronary syndromes. In
the plaque (see the Supplementary Appendix).6 In the appropriate clinical context, acute myocardial
the current era of potent lipid-lowering therapy, the infarction is indicated by a rising or falling pattern
proportion of cases in which erosion is the under- of troponin levels, with at least one value above the
lying cause is increasing as compared with the 99th percentile of a healthy reference population
proportion of cases in which rupture is the under- (upper reference limit).1 This rising or falling pat-
lying cause.7 A totally occluding thrombus typi- tern has become increasingly important as more
cally leads to STEMI.8 Partial occlusion, or occlu- sensitive assays have been introduced.9 High-sen-
sion in the presence of collateral circulation, sitivity assays for troponin, which are currently
results in non-STEMI or unstable angina (i.e., an available only outside the United States, increase
acute coronary syndrome without ST-segment diagnostic sensitivity and make it possible to
elevation)9 (Fig.1). The occurrence of acute myo- effectively rule out myocardial infarction in 1 to
cardial infarction in the absence of critical epicar- 2 hours; these include assays that may rule out
dial coronary disease is increasingly recognized acute myocardial infarction after a single sample
(accounting for approximately 10% of cases of has been obtained.11 However, such testing has
acute myocardial infarction). The various mech- decreased clinical specificity for acute myocardial
anisms underlying acute coronary syndromes, as infarction, since high-sensitivity assays detect the
well as risk factors for these disorders, are dis- presence of troponin in most normal persons,
cussed in the Supplementary Appendix. and increased troponin levels are observed in a
number of disorders other than acute myocardial
infarction, including myocarditis and other causes
Ini t i a l Medic a l E va luat ion,
Di agnos t ic T r i age , a nd R isk of cardiac injury; cardiac, renal, and respiratory
S t r at ific at ion failure; stroke or intracranial hemorrhage; septic
shock; and chronic structural heart disease.1 With
Patients with acute myocardial infarction may current troponin assays, concomitant measure-
present with typical ischemic-type chest discom- ment of creatine kinase MB or myoglobin levels,
fort or with dyspnea, nausea, unexplained weak- which is common practice, is redundant and no
ness, or a combination of these symptoms (see the longer recommended (ACCAHA class III recom-
Supplementary Appendix.) If an acute coronary mendation, evidence level A).9,12
syndrome is suspected, the patient should be re- The initial risk assessment of a patient in whom
ferred immediately to an emergency department an acute coronary syndrome is suspected should
for evaluation (American College of Cardiology address two risks: the risk that the presenting syn-
American Heart Association [ACCAHA] class I drome is in fact an acute coronary syndrome, and
recommendation, evidence level C).9 A 12-lead ECG if it is, the risk of an early adverse outcome.9,13 The
is obtained and evaluated for ischemic changes, risk of an early adverse outcome is more closely
with a goal of performing the evaluation in less linked to presenting features than to risk factors
than 10 minutes after the patients arrival in the for coronary artery disease. Two validated models
emergency department (ACCAHA class I recom- have been developed to assess this risk: the Throm-
mendation, evidence level C), and blood is sent for bolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) and Global
cardiac troponin testing (ACCAHA class I recom- Registry of Acute Coronary Events (GRACE) mod-
mendation, evidence level A). On the basis of the els, which are available online and can be useful
history and ECG, rapid diagnostic triage is per- in initial patient care (ACCAHA class IIa recom-
formed, with the case classified as STEMI,8 possi- mendation, evidence level B).9

2054 n engl j med 376;21nejm.org May 25, 2017

The New England Journal of Medicine

Downloaded from nejm.org on May 24, 2017. For personal use only. No other uses without permission.
Copyright 2017 Massachusetts Medical Society. All rights reserved.
 Acute Myocardial Infarction

PRESENTATION
Ischemic discomfort

WORKING
DIAGNOSIS

Supplydemand imbalance Acute coronary syndrome

(predominantly nonthrombotic) (atherothrombotic)

Nonthrombotic Plaque Partially Occluding Thrombus Fully Occluding Thrombus

Coronary Coronary Coronary
artery artery artery

Thrombus Thrombus
Plaque
Plaque Plaque

12-LEAD
ECG
ST-Segment Elevation Absent ST-Segment Elevation Absent ST-Segment Elevation Present

SERIAL
BIOMARKER
TESTING

No increase in Increased No increase in Increased Increased

biomarker level biomarker level biomarker level biomarker level biomarker level

FINAL NONST-SEGMENT
DIAGNOSIS ELEVATION ACUTE
CORONARY SYNDROME

Unstable angina Non-STEMI Unstable angina Non-STEMI STEMI

(demand-related) (type 2) (thrombosis-mediated) (type 1) (type 1)

FINAL ECG
MANIFESTATION
NonQ-wave MI NonQ-wave MI Q-wave MI

Figure 1. Spectrum of Pathologic and Clinical ST-Segment Elevation Acute Myocardial Infarction (STEMI) and Non-STEMI Acute
Coronary Syndromes.
Adapted from Morrow.10 ECG denotes electrocardiogram, and MI myocardial infarction.

Ini t i a l Medic a l C a r e tionassociated morbidity and mortality, making

rapid initial assessment, initiation of treatment,
Prehospital Care and transportation to a hospital essential elements
Prehospital cardiac arrest and extension of necro- of initial care (see the Supplementary Appendix).
sis are major factors in acute myocardial infarc- ECG assessment by emergency medical services,

n engl j med 376;21 nejm.org May 25, 2017 2055

The New England Journal of Medicine
Downloaded from nejm.org on May 24, 2017. For personal use only. No other uses without permission.
Copyright 2017 Massachusetts Medical Society. All rights reserved.
 The n e w e ng l a n d j o u r na l of m e dic i n e

Table 1. Six Initial Assessment and Management Decisions Pertaining to

The severity of the symptoms dictates other fea-
Patients Presenting with Chest Pain and a Possible Acute Coronary Syndrome.* tures of general care (Table2). Although the
routine use of oxygen supplementation is still
1. Triage to an acute coronary syndrome pathway (STEMI, non-STEMI, possi- widespread, current evidence does not support
ble or probable unstable angina, or nonischemic disorder) on the basis of
the history, examination, ECG, and cardiac troponin test result. its benefit in patients with normal oxygen levels.
2. Assess risk of cardiovascular death or recurrent ischemia (high, intermedi-
Hence, its use is recommended only for patients
ate, or low risk) on the basis of clinical features, ECG, and troponin test- with hypoxemia (oxygen saturation <90%), respi-
ing; an integrated risk score (e.g., TIMI or GRACE score) can be used. ratory distress, or other risk factors for hypoxemia
3. Initiate general care: limit activity; administer aspirin, nitroglycerin, and a (Table2).8,9 A large, randomized trial of oxygen
statin; consider administration of oxygen, beta-blocker, or morphine. supplementation in 6650 patients with acute myo-
4. Choose invasive or noninvasive (ischemia-guided) initial strategy; the choice cardial infarction (DETO2X-AMI [Determination
of early invasive management is based on risk and patients preferences. of the Role of Oxygen in Suspected Acute Myo-
5. Select a second antiplatelet agent to add to aspirin (P2Y12 inhibitor or gly- cardial Infarction]) is under way (ClinicalTrials
coprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitor), with selection based on thrombotic risk, tim-
ing of invasive strategy, likelihood of need for surgical revascularization,
.gov number, NCT01787110).
and risk of bleeding. Sublingual nitroglycerin is initially indicated
6. Choose an anticoagulant agent (unfractionated heparin, low-molecular- for relief of ischemic discomfort and may be fol-
weight heparin, fondaparinux, or bivalirudin) according to the initial man- lowed by intravenous therapy for ongoing ischemic
agement strategy (invasive or noninvasive) and risk of bleeding. discomfort, congestive heart failure, or uncon-
* ECG denotes electrocardiogram, GRACE Global Registry of Acute Coronary
trolled hypertension. The approach to beta-blocker
Events, STEMI ST-segment elevation acute myocardial infarction, and TIMI therapy is subject to debate, but overall, its use is
Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction. favored, with initiation during the first 24 hours
Fondaparinux is not approved for the treatment of acute coronary syndromes
in the United States.
after admission.8,9 Oral administration is gener-
ally safe, with intravenous therapy reserved for
unrelieved hypertension. Beta-blockers should be
with communication of a STEMI diagnosis to the avoided if the patient has risk factors for cardio-
receiving hospital and preferential transport to a genic shock. Initiation or continuation of high-
hospital with the facilities and expertise to perform intensity statin therapy is based on favorable pleio-
PCI, results in more rapid performance of primary tropic as well as cholesterol-lowering effects and
PCI and superior clinical outcomes.8,14,15 This strat- on improvements in cardiovascular outcomes.9 In
egy can save approximately 15 minutes but at a addition, angiotensin-convertingenzyme (ACE)
cost, since the rate of false activation of a STEMI inhibitors or angiotensin-receptor blockers have
protocol is as high as 36%.16,17 The ATLANTIC a role in the treatment of acute coronary syn-
(Administration of Ticagrelor in the Cath Lab or dromes, especially in patients with anterior acute
in the Ambulance for New ST Elevation Myocar- myocardial infarction, ventricular dysfunction, or
dial Infarction to Open the Coronary Artery) trial heart failure. In the absence of contraindications,
tested prehospital administration of ticagrelor, such therapy is begun within 24 hours after ad-
which inhibits the P2Y12 receptor, in patients with mission.8,9,13 A fraction of patients who have had
STEMI.18 The treatment was safe but did not im- an acute myocardial infarction also become candi-
prove pre-PCI coronary perfusion. Two random- dates for aldosterone inhibitors (ACCAHA class I
ized trials of prehospital induction of therapeutic recommendation, level of evidence A).8 Additional
hypothermia in resuscitated patients with out-of- considerations apply in patient groups of special
hospital cardiac arrest and initial ventricular fi- interest (see the Supplementary Appendix).
brillation showed that rapid, large-volume infu-
sions of cold fluids administered by paramedics Sel ec t ion of a M a nagemen t
modestly decreased core temperature at the time S t r ategy
of arrival at the hospital but did not improve out-
comes at discharge, as compared with in-hospital General management algorithms for STEMI and
cooling.19,20 acute coronary syndromes without ST-segment
elevation are shown in Figure2.
Emergency Department and Early Inpatient Care
The initial management of acute coronary syn- Treatment of STEMI
dromes includes bed rest with ECG monitoring Emergency reperfusion of ischemic myocardium
and prompt initiation of antithrombotic therapy. that is in the process of becoming infarcted is the

2056 n engl j med 376;21nejm.org May 25, 2017

The New England Journal of Medicine

Downloaded from nejm.org on May 24, 2017. For personal use only. No other uses without permission.
Copyright 2017 Massachusetts Medical Society. All rights reserved.
 Acute Myocardial Infarction

Table 2. Approach to Pharmacotherapy in Early Hospital Care of Patients with an Acute Coronary Syndrome without ST-Segment Elevation.*

Therapeutic Target Intervention

Myocardial supplydemand mismatch Oxygen: Administer supplemental oxygen only if oxygen saturation <90%.
Analgesics: Intravenous morphine (1 to 5 mg; may repeat in 5 to 30 min if necessary) may be rea-
sonable for persistent ischemic pain.
Nitrates: Administer sublingual nitroglycerin (0.3 to 0.4 mg; may repeat in 5 min, two times, as
needed) for ischemic pain and intravenous nitroglycerin for persistent ischemia, heart failure,
or hypertension.
Beta-blockers: An oral beta-blocker should be started in the first 24 hr if there is no heart failure,
low-output state, risk for shock, or other contraindication.
Calcium-channel blockers: A calcium-channel blocker (nondihydropyridine) should be used for
persistent ischemia when beta-blockers are not successful, are contraindicated, or have unac-
ceptable side effects.
Coronary thrombus Antiplatelet therapy: Administer oral aspirin (initial dose, 162 to 325 mg; then 81 to 325 mg daily
indefinitely) and a P2Y12 inhibitor.
Anticoagulant therapy: Administer an intravenous anticoagulant agent to all patients, regardless
of treatment strategy.
Unstable atheroma or disease Statin therapy: Initiate or continue high-intensity oral statin therapy (40 to 80 mg atorvastatin or
progression 20 to 40 mg rosuvastatin on admission and then daily) for cholesterol management.
ACE inhibitor: ACE inhibitors should be started in all patients with LVEF of <0.40 and in those
with hypertension, diabetes mellitus, or stable chronic kidney disease; ACE inhibitors may
also be reasonable in all other patients with cardiac or other vascular disease.

* The recommendations are adapted from Amsterdam et al.9 The approach to general treatment measures is similar for STEMI, although cal-
cium-channel blockers are only weakly recommended for patients for whom beta-blockers are associated with unacceptable adverse events.
The recommendation is class I for all listed interventions except analgesics and some uses of angiotensin-convertingenzyme (ACE) inhibi-
tors, which are both class IIb; ACE inhibitors are class I in all patients with a left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) of <0.40 and in those
with hypertension, diabetes mellitus, or stable chronic kidney disease and class IIb in all other patients with cardiac or other vascular dis-
ease. See Amsterdam et al.9 and Anderson et al.13 for additional information about dosages.
Beta-blockers also reduce the incidence of tachyarrhythmias. Patients with initial contraindications to beta-blockers should be reassessed for
eligibility.
Contraindications to calcium-channel blockers include left ventricular dysfunction, an increased risk of cardiogenic shock, a PR interval of
more than 0.24 seconds, and second- or third-degree atrioventricular block in a patient without a cardiac pacemaker.

most important advance in the treatment of STEMI class IIa recommendation, evidence level B).8
over the past three decades and is the primary With broad application of reperfusion therapy for
therapeutic goal. Coronary reperfusion is accom- STEMI, 30-day mortality rates have progressively
plished by means of primary PCI (angioplasty and declined from more than 20% to less than 5%.21
stenting) or intravenous fibrinolytic therapy. The recent evolution in the treatment of acute
Prompt PCI (with a performance goal of 90 min- myocardial infarction largely involves management
utes from the first medical contact) is the preferred in the catheterization laboratory. Implantation of
approach at PCI-capable hospitals for STEMI with either drug-eluting or bare-metal stents is sup-
onset of symptoms within the previous 12 hours ported by STEMI guidelines.8 Second-generation
(ACCAHA class I recommendation, evidence drug-eluting stents have assumed a dominant role
level A) and for STEMI with cardiogenic shock, in PCI. A 2013 network analysis that included 22
regardless of the timing (ACCAHA class I recom- trials and a total of 12,548 patients with STEMI
mendation, evidence level B).8 The advantages of showed evidence of steady improvement in out-
primary PCI over fibrinolysis include lower rates comes in association with the move from bare-
of early death, reinfarction, and intracranial hem- metal stents to first-generation and then second-
orrhage. However, when PCI is delayed by more generation drug-eluting stents.22 Cobalt chromium
than 120 minutes, fibrinolytic therapy should be everolimus-eluting stents had the most favorable
given if it is not contraindicated (ACCAHA class safety and efficacy profile, with reduced rates of
I recommendation, evidence level A), followed by cardiac death, acute myocardial infarction, and
routine consideration of transfer in the following stent thrombosis, as compared with bare-metal
3 to 24 hours to a PCI-capable facility (ACCAHA stents.

n engl j med 376;21nejm.org May 25, 2017 2057

The New England Journal of Medicine
Downloaded from nejm.org on May 24, 2017. For personal use only. No other uses without permission.
Copyright 2017 Massachusetts Medical Society. All rights reserved.
 2058
STEMI (if patient is candidate Non-STEMI (risk stratification and
for reperfusion therapy) assessment of patients preferences)

At hospital that At hospital that is For invasive strategy:

Ischemia-guided strategy
is PCI-capable not PCI-capable If within 2 hr, immediate
If within 1224 hr, early
If within 72 hr, elective

At catheterization Transfer to catheterization If anticipated time from first

laboratory laboratory medical contact to device
If 90 min from first If 120 min from first >120 min, fibrinolytic
medical contact medical contact therapy given (first medical
to device to device contact to fibrinolysis,
30 min)

DAPT with anticoagulant is initiated See ACCF guidelines DAPT with anticoagulant is initiated DAPT with anticoagulant is initiated
The

ASA 325 mg 1, then 81 mg daily for STEMI ASA 325 mg 1, then 81 mg daily ASA 325 mg 1, then 81 mg daily
P2Y12 inhibitor (clopidogrel, P2Y12 inhibitor (clopidogrel, P2Y12 inhibitor (clopidogrel
prasugrel, or ticagrelor) prasugrel, or ticagrelor) or ticagrelor)
Anticoagulant: UFH or bivalirudin Anticoagulant: UFH, enoxaparin, Anticoagulant: UFH, enoxaparin,
fondaparinux, or bivalirudin or fondaparinux

Medical therapy or revascularization Medical therapy or revascularization

according to findings at diagnostic according to findings at diagnostic
angiography angiography

For primary PCI, initiate For CABG, continue ASA For PCI, initiate or For CABG, continue ASA
Medical therapy Medical therapy
n e w e ng l a n d j o u r na l

or continue antiplatelet (interrupt P2Y12 and GPI) continue antiplatelet (interrupt P2Y12 and GPI)

The New England Journal of Medicine

and anticoagulant and anticoagulant
of

n engl j med 376;21nejm.org May 25, 2017

For predischarge or posthospital care
ASA 81 mg daily indefinitely

Copyright 2017 Massachusetts Medical Society. All rights reserved.

m e dic i n e

P2Y12 inhibitor for 12 mo after PCI with coronary

stenting, and for up to 12 mo otherwise
If medically treated: clopidogrel or ticagrelor
For post-PCI: clopidogrel, prasugrel, or ticagrelor
For post-CABG: clopidogrel or ticagrelor
For pre- or post-fibrinolysis: clopidogrel

Downloaded from nejm.org on May 24, 2017. For personal use only. No other uses without permission.
Figure 2. Algorithms for the Management of STEMI and Non-STEMI Acute Coronary Syndromes.
Adapted from OGara et al.8 and Amsterdam et al.9 Current guidelines recommend a maintenance dose of acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) of 81 to 325 mg daily but indicate that after per-
cutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), a maintenance dose of 81 mg daily is preferred over higher doses.9 ACCF denotes American College of Cardiology Foundation, CABG coro-
nary-artery bypass grafting, DAPT dual antiplatelet therapy, GPI glycoprotein inhibitor, and UFH unfractionated heparin.
 Acute Myocardial Infarction

An ongoing controversy in the use of PCI for most common. A meta-analysis of 12 randomized
STEMI is the approach to stenoses in nonculprit trials comparing transradial with transfemoral
coronary arteries.23 PCI of nonculprit stenoses PCI for the treatment of STEMI showed that radial
has been contraindicated on the basis of observa- access was associated with lower rates of access-
tional studies, which are subject to selection bias. site bleeding (2.1% vs. 5.6%), major bleeding (1.4%
More recently, three randomized trials with sam- vs. 2.9%), and death (2.7% vs. 4.7%), despite a
ples of intermediate size (296 to 627 patients) procedure time that was 2 minutes longer.33 The
showed reductions in ischemia-driven revascular- most recent and largest trial randomly assigned
ization and variable effects on the risks of recur- 8404 patients with either STEMI or non-STEMI
rent myocardial infarction and death with PCI of to radial or femoral access.34 Radial access was
nonculprit stenoses.24-26 A 2015 systematic review associated with a reduction in the rate of adverse
of five trials involving a total of 1568 patients clinical events at 30 days, driven by decreases in
confirmed a decreased risk of repeat revascular- deaths and major bleeding events, and was ben-
ization (relative risk, 0.36; 95% confidence inter- eficial for both types of acute myocardial infarc-
val [CI], 0.27 to 0.48) and a lower risk of nonfa- tion.34 One challenge to rapid adoption of the ra-
tal myocardial infarction (relative risk, 0.58; 95% dial approach in general practice is overcoming
CI, 0.36 to 0.93), with an uncertain effect on the the learning curve for achieving the outcomes
risk of death (relative risk, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.53 to observed in clinical trials.32
1.26).27 On the basis of this evidence,24-27 PCI of
nonculprit lesions may be considered either at Treatment of Acute Coronary Syndromes
the time of primary PCI in hemodynamically stable without ST-Segment Elevation
patients or as a staged procedure (ACCAHA class Given residual perfusion in the ischemic zone in
IIb recommendation, level of evidence B).23 Larger acute coronary syndromes without ST-segment
multicenter, randomized trials are needed, includ- elevation, the urgency of and approach to revascu-
ing trials comparing staged versus immediate PCI larization differ from that in STEMI. Once a defi-
of nonculprit arteries; one such trial, COMPLETE nite or likely diagnosis of an acute coronary syn-
(Complete vs. Culprit-Only Revascularization to drome without ST-segment elevation has been
Treat Multi-Vessel Disease after Primary PCI for made, the patient is triaged to either an invasive
STEMI), is ongoing (NCT01740479). strategy or an ischemia-guided strategy (i.e., an
Although early data favored manual thrombus initial medical strategy with angiography re-
aspiration during primary PCI,28 data from more served for evidence of spontaneous or provoked
recent trials have not.29-31 In the largest trial (in- ischemia).9
volving 10,732 patients), manual aspiration had no An invasive strategy leads to improved out-
significant effect on the risk of death from cardio- comes and is favored for the majority of patients;
vascular causes, myocardial infarction, or severe the urgency of angiography (performed with the
heart failure at 180 days, as compared with conven- goal of revascularization) depends on the pres-
tional PCI (without aspiration thrombectomy) ence or absence of high-risk features (Table3). If
(hazard ratio, 0.99), and the risk of stroke at 30 initial medical therapy stabilizes the patients he-
days was higher with manual aspiration (0.7% vs. modynamic condition and relieves ischemic dis-
0.3%).30 Similarly, in a meta-analysis of 17 trials comfort, angiography can proceed within 12 to
involving 20,960 patients, aspiration thrombecto- 24 hours. An even more delayed approach (with
my was not shown to be of benefit in reducing the angiography performed within 25 to 72 hours) is
risk of death or reinfarction (hazard ratio, 0.90; an option for patients at lower immediate risk.9,35
P=0.11).31 Currently, the routine use of thrombus In patients whose condition is unstable, urgent
aspiration during PCI is not indicated, and selec- PCI is performed, as it is for patients with STEMI.
tive use is viewed as poorly founded (ACCAHA An ischemia-guided strategy is chosen for pa-
class IIb recommendation, evidence level C).23 tients at low risk for recurrent ischemia (especially
In response to adverse outcomes associated for women at low-risk and others for whom angi-
with bleeding complications of PCI, radial-artery ography carries excessive risk), for patients at hos-
access has been advocated for coronary angiog- pitals where interventional services are unavailable,
raphy and PCI,32 particularly for patients with and on the basis of the patients or physicians
STEMI, in whom bleeding at the access site is preference. Fibrinolytic therapy may be harmful

n engl j med 376;21nejm.org May 25, 2017 2059

The New England Journal of Medicine
Downloaded from nejm.org on May 24, 2017. For personal use only. No other uses without permission.
Copyright 2017 Massachusetts Medical Society. All rights reserved.
 The n e w e ng l a n d j o u r na l of m e dic i n e

Table 3. Invasive and Ischemia-Guided Intervention Categories in Patients with Non-STEMI Acute Coronary Syndromes.*

Variable Invasive Intervention Ischemia-Guided Intervention

Immediate Early Delayed

Timing Within 2 hr Within 24 hr Within 2572 hr Depends on spontaneous or
provoked ischemia
Indications Refractory angina, new-onset High risk (e.g., GRACE Intermediate risk (e.g., GRACE Low risk (e.g., TIMI score of 0 or
heart failure, new or wors- score >140), rising score of 109140, TIMI 1); low-risk and troponin-
ening mitral regurgita- troponin level, new score of 2), ejection frac- negative women, patients
tion, recurrent angina ST-segment depres- tion <40%, postinfarction or physicians preference in
during maximal medical sion angina, diabetes, renal in- absence of high-risk features,
therapy sufficiency, prior CABG, unavailability of interven-
recent PCI (within 6 mo) tional facilities or expertise

* Data are adapted from Amsterdam et al.9

Invasive interventions are those involving coronary angiography with the intention to perform percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or
to refer the patient for CABG (coronary-artery bypass grafting), as appropriate.

in patients who have an acute coronary syndrome rin is required with ticagrelor and is preferred
without ST-segment elevation and is therefore with prasugrel, the dose with clopidogrel is uncer-
contraindicated. At the time of angiography, PCI tain. In the large CURRENTOASIS 7 (Clopidogrel
is the most common intervention, but depending Optimal Loading Dose Usage to Reduce Recurrent
on the coronary anatomy and clinical features, a EventsOptimal Antiplatelet Strategy for Inter-
decision may be made to perform CABG instead ventions) trial, which had a factorial design, pa-
of PCI or to forgo an intervention. Nonculprit tients with acute coronary syndromes were ran-
arteries may be approached with the same cau- domly assigned to either double-dose clopidogrel
tions as for nonculprit arteries in patients with (600-mg loading dose on day 1, followed by 150
STEMI. Indeed, because the culprit artery may mg daily for 6 days and 75 mg daily thereafter) or
be difficult to identify with certainty in patients standard-dose clopidogrel (300-mg loading dose
who have an acute coronary syndrome without and 75 mg daily thereafter) and either high-dose
ST-segment elevation, simultaneous multivessel aspirin (300 to 325 mg daily) or low-dose aspirin
PCI is often performed if the patient is hemody- (75 to 100 mg daily). A nominal advantage was
namically stable. observed for patients undergoing PCI per proto-
col who received double-dose clopidogrel plus
A n t i thrombo t ic Ther a py high-dose aspirin for 1 week (P=0.03 for interac-
tion).37,38 A large pragmatic trial is testing a daily
Given the critical role of coronary thrombosis in maintenance dose of 81 mg versus 325 mg of as-
the precipitation of acute myocardial infarction, pirin for secondary atherothrombosis prevention
antithrombotic therapy has assumed a cardinal (NCT02697916).
role in the management of acute coronary syn- In addition to aspirin, an oral P2Y12 inhibitor
dromes.36 (clopidogrel, prasugrel, or ticagrelor) is recom-
mended for all higher-risk patients. For patients
Antiplatelet Agents with STEMI who are undergoing primary PCI, a
Nonenteric-coated aspirin, at a dose of 162 to loading dose should be given as early as possible
325 mg, is recommended at the time of the first or at the time of PCI, followed by a daily mainte-
medical contact for all patients with an acute coro- nance dose for at least 1 year (ACCAHA class I
nary syndrome (ACCAHA class I recommenda- recommendation, evidence level A).8 Two random-
tion, evidence level A).8,9 The initial dose is fol- ized trials have failed to support routine upstream
lowed by a daily maintenance dose of 81 to 325 mg administration of prasugrel or ticagrelor before
of aspirin, which is given indefinitely (ACCAHA timely PCI for patients with acute coronary syn-
class I recommendation, evidence level A).8,9 How- dromes.18,39 Whereas prasugrel and ticagrelor,
ever, whereas an 81-mg maintenance dose of aspi- which are more potent than clopidogrel, may be

2060 n engl j med 376;21nejm.org May 25, 2017

The New England Journal of Medicine

Downloaded from nejm.org on May 24, 2017. For personal use only. No other uses without permission.
Copyright 2017 Massachusetts Medical Society. All rights reserved.
 Acute Myocardial Infarction

preferred with primary PCI, clopidogrel is recom- Anticoagulant Agents

mended in association with fibrinolytic therapy Administration of a parenteral anticoagulant agent
and is given after fibrinolytic therapy for a mini- (i.e., unfractionated heparin, enoxaparin, bivaliru-
mum of 14 days (ACCAHA class I recommenda- din, or fondaparinux) is recommended for patients
tion, evidence level A) and for a maximum of 1 year who present with an acute coronary syndrome
(ACCAHA class I recommendation, evidence (ACCAHA class I recommendation, evidence level
level C).8 For an acute coronary syndrome with- A).8,9 Fondaparinux alone does not provide ade-
out ST-segment elevation, clopidogrel or ticagrelor quate anticoagulation to support PCI but is useful
is indicated at the time of presentation for patients for medical therapy, especially if the risk of bleed-
treated with either an early invasive strategy or an ing is high. Enoxaparin is somewhat more effec-
ischemia-guided strategy (ACCAHA class I rec- tive than unfractionated heparin, particularly in
ommendation, evidence level B).9 Prasugrel be- patients who are treated with a noninvasive strat-
comes an option for an acute coronary syndrome egy. During noninvasive management of an acute
without ST-segment elevation that is being man- coronary syndrome, anticoagulants are adminis-
aged with an early invasive approach at the time tered for at least 2 days and preferably for the
of stenting (ACCAHA class I recommendation, duration of hospitalization, up to 8 days, or until
evidence level B). Ticagrelor and prasugrel are PCI is performed. Anticoagulants are typically
more effective than clopidogrel40,41 and are gener- discontinued after uncomplicated PCI.8,9 A cur-
ally preferred in patients who are not at high risk rent controversy is the choice of bivalirudin ver-
for bleeding (e.g., those without a history of stroke sus heparin. Early trials showed that bivalirudin
or transient ischemic attack) (ACCAHA class IIa reduced the risk of major bleeding, as compared
recommendation, evidence level B).9 A large, on- with heparin or enoxaparin plus a glycoprotein
going trial (TAILOR-PCI [Tailored Antiplatelet IIb/IIIa inhibitor.44,45 However, in these trials, nu-
Therapy Following PCI]; NCT01742117) is evalu- merical increases in ischemic events were noted
ating the use of pharmacogenetic testing at the with bivalirudin, as well as increases in acute stent
time of PCI to improve ischemic outcomes with thrombosis in patients with STEMI.46 In the
clopidogrel in patients with acute coronary syn- HEAT-PPCI (How Effective Are Antithrombotic
dromes or stable coronary artery disease. The ef- Therapies in Primary Percutaneous Intervention)
ficacy of clopidogrel relies on its conversion (by the trial, which relegated glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibi-
CYP2C19 enzyme) to its active metabolite. Patients tors to bailout use and administered conservative
in the pharmacogenetic group who have a reduced- doses of heparin, bleeding rates were similar and
function allele (CYP2C19 *2 or *3) are assigned to ischemic outcomes were reduced with heparin as
ticagrelor. The comparison group receives stan- compared with bivalirudin.47 Complicating the in-
dard clopidogrel dosing. terpretation of these findings are divergent find-
Glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors, an older class ings in a Chinese study.48 Matching the intensity
of antiplatelet drugs given intravenously, have a and duration of anticoagulant therapy to the pa-
more limited role in the treatment of acute coro- tients risk profile appears to be more important
nary syndromes, but when needed, they can pro- than the anticoagulant choice.49
vide rapid onset of antiplatelet activity before the
patient is taken to the catheterization laboratory Combined Oral Anticoagulant
or for prevention and treatment of periprocedural and Antiplatelet Therapy
thrombotic complications. Cangrelor, a short-act- On the basis of limited evidence and expert opin-
ing intravenous P2Y12 inhibitor, has recently be- ion, current guidelines recommend antiplatelet
come available as an adjunct to PCI for reducing therapy combined with oral anticoagulant thera-
the risk of periprocedural ischemic events in pa- py with a vitamin K antagonist in patients with
tients who have not been pretreated with a P2Y12 STEMI who have an elevated risk of atrial fibril-
or a glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitor. With its fast lation, mechanical heart valves, venous throm-
onsetoffset actions, cangrelor is superior to clopi- boembolism, or hypercoagulable disorders. The
dogrel when clopidogrel preloading has not oc- guidelines state that the duration of triple therapy
curred,42,43 but cangrelor has not been compared (e.g., a vitamin K antagonist and dual antiplate-
with prasugrel, ticagrelor, or the glycoprotein let therapy with aspirin and clopidogrel) should
IIb/IIIa inhibitors.36 be as short as possible, given the risk of increased

n engl j med 376;21nejm.org May 25, 2017 2061

The New England Journal of Medicine
Downloaded from nejm.org on May 24, 2017. For personal use only. No other uses without permission.
Copyright 2017 Massachusetts Medical Society. All rights reserved.
 The n e w e ng l a n d j o u r na l of m e dic i n e

bleeding.9,50 The WOEST (What Is the Optimal L ate Inpat ien t a nd

Antiplatelet and Anticoagulant Therapy in Patients Pr edisch a rge C a r e
with Oral Anticoagulation and Coronary Stenting)
trial, a single-center study involving 563 patients In the era of primary PCI, the duration of hospi-
(28% of whom had acute coronary syndromes), talization is as short as 3 days for uncomplicated
showed that an oral anticoagulant plus clopido- acute myocardial infarction, with observational
grel without aspirin, as compared with an oral studies suggesting that the outcomes for patients
anticoagulant plus clopidogrel and aspirin, re- admitted to a step-down unit are similar to the
duced the risk of clinical bleeding (hazard ratio, outcomes of intensive care. During the later hos-
0.36; 95% CI, 0.26 to 0.50) without an increase pital phase, patients activity is increased but con-
in thrombotic events.51 tinues to be closely monitored. Medical therapy is
A more recent study, PIONEER AF-PCI (Open- transitioned to oral medications that are appro-
Label, Randomized, Controlled, Multicenter Study priate for long-term outpatient use. Near the time
Exploring Two Treatment Strategies of Rivaroxa- of discharge, functional evaluations are under-
ban and a Dose-Adjusted Oral Vitamin K Antago- taken, including echocardiography for left ven-
nist Treatment Strategy in Subjects with Atrial tricular functional assessment and, in selected
Fibrillation who Undergo Percutaneous Coronary patients (e.g., patients treated with an ischemia-
Intervention), involved 2124 patients with atrial guided strategy), exercise stress testing. Education
fibrillation (50% of whom had acute coronary is provided about diet, activity, smoking, and other
syndromes) who underwent PCI and stenting.52 risk factors (e.g., lipids, hypertension, and diabe-
In the study, low-dose rivaroxaban (15 mg daily) tes); outpatient medical and secondary prevention
plus a P2Y12 inhibitor (primarily clopidogrel, at therapies are reviewed; and follow-up planning
75 mg daily), without aspirin, for 12 months or occurs (Table S1 in the Supplementary Appendix).
very-low-dose rivaroxaban (2.5 mg twice daily) plus Important in discharge planning is referral to car-
dual antiplatelet therapy for 1, 6, or 12 months, diac rehabilitation, which is an ACCAHA class I
was compared with standard therapy (a vitamin K recommendation (evidence level B) because of its
antagonist plus dual antiplatelet therapy for 1, 6, favorable effects on outcomes.8,9,13 Three large,
or 12 months). The rates of clinically significant randomized clinical trials are investigating wheth-
bleeding were lower with either of the rivaroxa- er potent regimens of antiinflammatory treatment
ban regimens than with standard therapy (hazard with colchicine, methotrexate, or canakinumab can
ratio with the low-dose regimen, 0.59; 95% CI, be effective as secondary prevention to reduce the
0.47 to 0.76; hazard ratio with the very-low-dose risk of subsequent acute myocardial infarction
regimen, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.50 to 0.80; P<0.001 for (NCT02551094, NCT01594333, and NCT01327846).
both comparisons). The rates of death from cardio-
vascular causes, myocardial infarction, or stroke F u t ur e Dir ec t ions
were similar among the groups. This emerging
database of accumulated evidence from clinical Although the case fatality rates among patients
trials points to new options for improving clini- with acute myocardial infarction have declined
cal outcomes in patients with acute myocardial substantially, considerable opportunities for im-
infarction who have indications for oral antico- provement remain. Care of patients with acute
agulant therapy. coronary syndromes has advanced remarkably over
the past three decades and continues to evolve.
Adherence to evidence-based guidelines for the
C ompl ic at ions
care of such patients correlates with improved
The rates of major complications of acute myocar- outcomes. Continued efforts aimed at improving
dial infarction have declined dramatically with the translation of evidence-based interventions
early reperfusion and current medical therapy.53 into routine practice are essential.54 Several new
Nevertheless, complications are a leading cause therapeutic approaches, such as reducing inflam-
of death and deserve careful consideration (see mation, mitigating reperfusion injury, inducing
details in the Supplementary Appendix).8,9,13,21 myocardial regeneration, and ameliorating adverse

2062 n engl j med 376;21nejm.org May 25, 2017

The New England Journal of Medicine

Downloaded from nejm.org on May 24, 2017. For personal use only. No other uses without permission.
Copyright 2017 Massachusetts Medical Society. All rights reserved.
 Acute Myocardial Infarction

remodeling, are under active investigation but, health and remains a crucial target for scientific
with the exception of ACE inhibition, have so far advancement in medicine.
not proved beneficial in the acute care setting. Dr. Anderson reports receiving consulting fees from Medi-
Because of improved rates of short-term survival cure, AstraZeneca, and the Medicines Company; Dr. Morrow,
after acute myocardial infarction owing to con- consulting fees from diaDexus, Gilead Sciences, Instrumenta-
tion Laboratories, Radiometer, and Novartis, grant support
temporary management methods, subsequent de- from Gilead Sciences, grant support (paid to Brigham and
velopment of heart failure is emerging as a promi- Womens Hospital) from Abbott Laboratories, grant support
nent cause of longer-term illness and death. The (paid to the TIMI Study Group) from AstraZeneca, Daiichi San-
kyo/Eli Lilly, Eisai, GlaxoSmithKline, Merck, Novartis, Roche
very high mortality rate (>40%) among patients Diagnostics, and Amgen, personal fees from Abbott Laborato-
with cardiogenic shock after acute myocardial ries and AstraZeneca, and fees from Merck for serving on an
infarction remains a particular challenge in need advisory board. No other potential conflict of interest relevant
to this article was reported.
of solutions. Acute myocardial infarction contin- Disclosure forms provided by the authors are available with
ues to have a major effect on national and global the full text of this article at NEJM.org.

References
1. Thygesen K, Alpert JS, Jaffe AS, et al. American Heart Association Task Force al. Emergency department bypass for ST-
Third universal definition of myocardial on Practice Guidelines. J Am Coll Cardiol segment-elevation myocardial infarction
infarction. J Am Coll Cardiol 2012; 60: 2014;64(24):e139-e228. patients identified with a prehospital elec-
1581-98. 10. Morrow DA, ed. Myocardial infarc- trocardiogram: a report from the Ameri-
2. Mozaffarian D, Benjamin EJ, Go AS, tion: a companion to Braunwalds Heart can Heart Association Mission: Lifeline
et al. Heart disease and stroke statistics Disease. St. Louis:Elsevier, 2016:2. program. Circulation 2013;128:352-9.
2016 update: a report from the Ameri- 11. Morrow DA. Evidence-based algo- 16. Diercks DB, Kontos MC, Chen AY, et
can Heart Association. Circulation 2016; rithms using high-sensitivity cardiac tro- al. Utilization and impact of pre-hospital
133(4):e38-e360. ponin in the emergency department. electrocardiograms for patients with
3. Murray CJ, Barber RM, Foreman KJ, et JAMA Cardiol 2016;1:379-81. acute ST-segment elevation myocardial
al. Global, regional, and national disability- 12. Volz KA, McGillicuddy DC, Horowitz infarction: data from the NCDR (National
adjusted life years (DALYs) for 306 diseases GL, Sanchez LD. Creatine kinase-MB does Cardiovascular Data Registry) ACTION
and injuries and healthy life expectancy not add additional benefit to a negative (Acute Coronary Treatment and Interven-
(HALE) for 188 countries, 1990-2013: troponin in the evaluation of chest pain. tion Outcomes Network) Registry. J Am
quantifying the epidemiological transi- Am J Emerg Med 2012;30:188-90. Coll Cardiol 2009;53:161-6.
tion. Lancet 2015;386:2145-91. 13. Anderson JL, Adams CD, Antman EM, 17. McCabe JM, Armstrong EJ, Kulkarni
4. Murray CJ, Vos T, Lozano R, et al. et al. ACC/AHA 2007 guidelines for the A, et al. Prevalence and factors associated
Disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) for management of patients with unstable with false-positive ST-segment elevation
291 diseases and injuries in 21 regions, angina/non ST-elevation myocardial in- myocardial infarction diagnoses at prima-
1990-2010: a systematic analysis for the farction: a report of the American College ry percutaneous coronary intervention
Global Burden of Disease Study 2010. of Cardiology/American Heart Associa- capable centers: a report from the Acti-
Lancet 2012;380:2197-223. tion Task Force on Practice Guidelines vate-SF registry. Arch Intern Med 2012;
5. Yusuf S, Rangarajan S, Teo K, et al. (Writing Committee to Revise the 2002 172:864-71.
Cardiovascular risk and events in 17 low-, Guidelines for the Management of Pa- 18. Montalescot G, van t Hof AW, Lapos-
middle-, and high-income countries. N Engl tients With Unstable Angina/Non ST-Ele- tolle F, et al. Prehospital ticagrelor in ST-
J Med 2014;371:818-27. vation Myocardial Infarction): developed segment elevation myocardial infarction.
6. Libby P. Mechanisms of acute coro- in collaboration with the American Col- N Engl J Med 2014;371:1016-27.
nary syndromes and their implications lege of Emergency Physicians, the Society 19. Bernard SA, Smith K, Cameron P, et al.
for therapy. N Engl J Med 2013;368:2004- for Cardiovascular Angiography and In- Induction of therapeutic hypothermia by
13. terventions, and the Society of Thoracic paramedics after resuscitation from out-
7. Libby P, Bornfeldt KE, Tall AR. Ath- Surgeons: endorsed by the American As- of-hospital ventricular fibrillation cardiac
erosclerosis: successes, surprises, and sociation of Cardiovascular and Pulmo- arrest: a randomized controlled trial. Cir-
future challenges. Circ Res 2016; 118: nary Rehabilitation and the Society for culation 2010;122:737-42.
531-4. Academic Emergency Medicine. Circula- 20. Kim F, Nichol G, Maynard C, et al.
8. OGara PT, Kushner FG, Ascheim DD, tion 2007;116(7):e148-e304. Effect of prehospital induction of mild
et al. 2013 ACCF/AHA guideline for the 14. Ting HH, Krumholz HM, Bradley EH, hypothermia on survival and neurological
management of ST-elevation myocardial et al. Implementation and integration of status among adults with cardiac arrest: a
infarction: a report of the American Col- prehospital ECGs into systems of care for randomized clinical trial. JAMA 2014;311:
lege of Cardiology Foundation/American acute coronary syndrome: a scientific 45-52.
Heart Association Task Force on Practice statement from the American Heart As- 21. Anderson JL. ST-elevation acute myo-
Guidelines. J Am Coll Cardiol 2013;61(4): sociation Interdisciplinary Council on cardial infarction and complications of
e78-e140. Quality of Care and Outcomes Research, myocardial infarction. In:Goldman L,
9. Amsterdam EA, Wenger NK, Brindis Emergency Cardiovascular Care Commit- Schafer AI, eds. Goldmans Cecil medi-
RG, et al. 2014 AHA/ACC guideline for the tee, Council on Cardiovascular Nursing, cine. 25th ed. Philadelphia:Elsevier Saun-
management of patients with non-ST-ele- and Council on Clinical Cardiology. Cir- ders, 2016:441-56.
vation acute coronary syndromes: a report culation 2008;118:1066-79. 22. Palmerini T, Biondi-Zoccai G, Della
of the American College of Cardiology/ 15. Bagai A, Jollis JG, Dauerman HL, et Riva D, et al. Clinical outcomes with

n engl j med 376;21nejm.org May 25, 2017 2063

The New England Journal of Medicine
Downloaded from nejm.org on May 24, 2017. For personal use only. No other uses without permission.
Copyright 2017 Massachusetts Medical Society. All rights reserved.
 Acute Myocardial Infarction

drug-eluting and bare-metal stents in pa- 32. Hinohara TT, Rao SV. Current state of ventions: a pooled analysis of patient-level
tients with ST-segment elevation myocar- radial artery catheterization in ST-elevation data. Lancet 2013;382:1981-92.
dial infarction: evidence from a compre- myocardial infarction. Prog Cardiovasc Dis 44. Stone GW, McLaurin BT, Cox DA, et
hensive network meta-analysis. J Am Coll 2015;58:241-6. al. Bivalirudin for patients with acute
Cardiol 2013;62:496-504. 33. Karrowni W, Vyas A, Giacomino B, et coronary syndromes. N Engl J Med 2006;
23. Levine GN, Bates ER, Blankenship JC, al. Radial versus femoral access for pri- 355:2203-16.
et al. 2015 ACC/AHA/SCAI focused update mary percutaneous interventions in ST- 45. Stone GW, Witzenbichler B, Gua-
on primary percutaneous coronary inter- segment elevation myocardial infarction gliumi G, et al. Bivalirudin during pri-
vention for patients with ST-elevation myo- patients: a meta-analysis of randomized mary PCI in acute myocardial infarction.
cardial infarction: an update of the 2011 controlled trials. JACC Cardiovasc Interv N Engl J Med 2008;358:2218-30.
ACCF/AHA/SCAI guideline for percutane- 2013;6:814-23. 46. Cavender MA, Sabatine MS. Bivaliru-
ous coronary intervention and the 2013 34. Valgimigli M, Gagnor A, Calabr P, et din versus heparin in patients planned
ACCF/AHA guideline for the management al. Radial versus femoral access in pa- for percutaneous coronary intervention:
of ST-elevation myocardial infarction. tients with acute coronary syndromes un- a meta-analysis of randomised controlled
J Am Coll Cardiol 2016;67:1235-50. dergoing invasive management: a ran- trials. Lancet 2014;384:599-606.
24. Wald DS, Morris JK, Wald NJ, et al. domised multicentre trial. Lancet 2015; 47. Shahzad A, Kemp I, Mars C, et al. Un-
Randomized trial of preventive angio- 385:2465-76. fractionated heparin versus bivalirudin in
plasty in myocardial infarction. N Engl J 35. Mehta SR, Granger CB, Boden WE, et primary percutaneous coronary interven-
Med 2013;369:1115-23. al. Early versus delayed invasive interven- tion (HEAT-PPCI): an open-label, single
25. Engstrm T, Kelbk H, Helqvist S, et tion in acute coronary syndromes. N Engl centre, randomised controlled trial. Lan-
al. Complete revascularisation versus J Med 2009;360:2165-75. cet 2014;384:1849-58.
treatment of the culprit lesion only in pa- 36. Huber K, Bates ER, Valgimigli M, et 48. Han Y, Guo J, Zheng Y, et al. Bivaliru-
tients with ST-segment elevation myocar- al. Antiplatelet and anticoagulation din vs heparin with or without tirofiban
dial infarction and multivessel disease agents in acute coronary syndromes: what during primary percutaneous coronary
(DANAMI-3PRIMULTI): an open-label, is the current status and what does the intervention in acute myocardial infarc-
randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2015; future hold? Am Heart J 2014;168:611-21. tion: the BRIGHT randomized clinical
386:665-71. 37. The CURRENTOASIS 7 Investigators. trial. JAMA 2015;313:1336-46.
26. Gershlick AH, Khan JN, Kelly DJ, et Dose comparisons of clopidogrel and as- 49. Cavender MA, Faxon DP. Can BRIGHT
al. Randomized trial of complete versus pirin in acute coronary syndromes. N Engl restore the glow of bivalirudin? JAMA
lesion-only revascularization in patients J Med 2010;363:930-42. 2015;313:1323-4.
undergoing primary percutaneous coro- 38. Mehta SR, Tanguay JF, Eikelboom JW, 50. Camm AJ, Kirchhof P, Lip GY, et al.
nary intervention for STEMI and multi- et al. Double-dose versus standard-dose Guidelines for the management of atrial
vessel disease: the CvLPRIT trial. J Am clopidogrel and high-dose versus low-dose fibrillation: the Task Force for the Man-
Coll Cardiol 2015;65:963-72. aspirin in individuals undergoing percuta- agement of Atrial Fibrillation of the Euro-
27. Spencer FA, Sekercioglu N, Prasad M, neous coronary intervention for acute cor- pean Society of Cardiology (ESC). Eur
Lopes LC, Guyatt GH. Culprit vessel ver- onary syndromes (CURRENT-OASIS 7): Heart J 2010;31:2369-429.
sus immediate complete revasculariza- a randomised factorial trial. Lancet 2010; 51. Dewilde WJ, Oirbans T, Verheugt FW,
tion in patients with ST-segment myocar- 376:1233-43. et al. Use of clopidogrel with or without
dial infarction-a systematic review. Am 39. Montalescot G, Bolognese L, Dudek aspirin in patients taking oral anticoagu-
Heart J 2015;170:1133-9. D, et al. Pretreatment with prasugrel in lant therapy and undergoing percutane-
28. Svilaas T, Vlaar PJ, van der Horst IC, et nonST-segment elevation acute coronary ous coronary intervention: an open-label,
al. Thrombus aspiration during primary syndromes. N Engl J Med 2013;369:999- randomised, controlled trial. Lancet 2013;
percutaneous coronary intervention. 1010. 381:1107-15.
N Engl J Med 2008;358:557-67. 40. Wiviott SD, Braunwald E, McCabe 52. Gibson CM, Mehran R, Bode C, et al.
29. Frbert O, Lagerqvist B, Olivecrona CH, et al. Prasugrel versus clopidogrel in Prevention of bleeding in patients with
GK, et al. Thrombus aspiration during ST- patients with acute coronary syndromes. atrial fibrillation undergoing PCI. N Engl
segment elevation myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med 2007;357:2001-15. J Med 2016;375:2423-34.
N Engl J Med 2013;369:1587-97. 41. Wallentin L, Becker RC, Budaj A, et al. 53. French JK, Hellkamp AS, Armstrong
30. Jolly SS, Cairns JA, Yusuf S, et al. Ran- Ticagrelor versus clopidogrel in patients PW, et al. Mechanical complications after
domized trial of primary PCI with or with acute coronary syndromes. N Engl J percutaneous coronary intervention in
without routine manual thrombectomy. Med 2009;361:1045-57. ST-elevation myocardial infarction (from
N Engl J Med 2015;372:1389-98. 42. Bhatt DL, Stone GW, Mahaffey KW, et APEX-AMI). Am J Cardiol 2010;105:59-63.
31. Elgendy IY, Huo T, Bhatt DL, Bavry al. Effect of platelet inhibition with can- 54. Wallentin L, Kristensen SD, Anderson
AA. Is aspiration thrombectomy beneficial grelor during PCI on ischemic events. JL, et al. How can we optimize the pro-
in patients undergoing primary percutane- N Engl J Med 2013;368:1303-13. cesses of care for acute coronary syn-
ous coronary intervention? Meta-analysis 43. Steg PG, Bhatt DL, Hamm CW, et al. dromes to improve outcomes? Am Heart J
of randomized trials. Circ Cardiovasc In- Effect of cangrelor on periprocedural out- 2014;168:622-31.
terv 2015;8(7):e002258. comes in percutaneous coronary inter- Copyright 2017 Massachusetts Medical Society.

2064 n engl j med 376;21nejm.org May 25, 2017

The New England Journal of Medicine

Downloaded from nejm.org on May 24, 2017. For personal use only. No other uses without permission.
Copyright 2017 Massachusetts Medical Society. All rights reserved.