Association of intravenous morphine use and outcomes in acute coronary syndromes: results from the CRUSADE Quality Improvement Initiative

Acute coronary syndromes: diagnosis and management, part I

The term acute coronary syndrome (ACS) refers to any group of clinical symptoms compatible with acute myocardial ischemia and includes unstable angina (UA), non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI), and ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). These high-risk manifestations of coronary atherosclerosis are important causes of the use of emergency medical care and hospitalization in the United States. A quick but thorough assessment of the patient's history and findings on physical examination, electrocardiography, radiologic studies, and cardiac biomarker tests permit accurate diagnosis and aid in early risk stratification, which is essential for guiding treatment. High-risk patients with UA/NSTEMI are often treated with an early invasive strategy involving cardiac catheterization and prompt revascularization of viable myocardium at risk. Clinical outcomes can be optimized by revascularization coupled with aggressive medical therapy that includes anti-ischemic, antiplatelet, anticoagulant, and lipid-lowering drugs. Evidence-based guidelines provide recommendations for the management of ACS; however, therapeutic approaches to the management of ACS continue to evolve at a rapid pace driven by a multitude of large-scale randomized controlled trials. Thus, clinicians are frequently faced with the problem of determining which drug or therapeutic strategy will achieve the best results. This article summarizes the evidence and provides the clinician with the latest information about the pathophysiology, clinical presentation, and risk stratification of ACS and the management of UA/NSTEMI.

Cardiovascular manifestations of sedatives and analgesics in the critical care unit

There are numerous sedatives and analgesics used in critical care medicine today; these medications are used on critically ill patients, many of whom have heart disease, including coronary artery disease or congestive heart failure. The purpose of this review is to recognize the effects of these medications on the heart. Studies that evaluated the effects of sedatives and analgesics on normal individuals or on those with heart disease were reviewed. Current choices for sustained sedation in the critically ill include the benzodiazepines, morphine, propofol, and etomidate. Each of these medications has their particular advantages and disadvantages. Benzodiazepines provide the greatest amnesia and cardiovascular safety but they can cause significant hypotension in the hemodynamically unstable patient. Morphine provides analgesia and cardioprotective activity after ischemia, although the large observational study CRUSADE showed increased mortality rate in those patients with non-ST segment elevation myocardial infarction who received morphine. Propofol is the most easily titratable drug with cardioprotective features, but its use must be accompanied with great attention to possible development of propofol infusion syndrome, which is a deadly disease, especially in patients with head injury and those with septic shock receiving vasopressors. Etomidate has a rapid onset effect and short period of action with great hemodynamic stability even in patients with shock and hypovolemia, but the incidence of adrenal insufficiency during infusion, not bolus doses, may cause deterioration in the circulatory stability. In conclusion, the sedatives and analgesics mentioned here have characteristics that give them a cardiovascular safety profile useful in critically ill patients. However, use of these drugs on an individual basis is dependent on each agent's safety and efficacy.

Management of patients with unstable angina / non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction: a critical review of the 2007 ACC /AHA guidelines

BACKGROUND

In 2007, the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) published new guidelines for the diagnosis and management of patients with unstable angina/non-ST segment elevation myocardial infarction (UA/NSTEMI). These guidelines include some important updates on the use of clopidogrel, fondaparinux, bivalirudin and low-molecular-weight heparins (LMWHs) all of which have published landmark clinical trials in patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) since the publication of the 2002 guidelines. While these 2007 guidelines are more comprehensive and up-to-date compared with the recommendations published in 2002, they also raise many questions for practising emergency physicians and cardiologists.

METHODS

This article presents a critical review of the 2007 ACC/AHA UA/NSTEMI guidelines, highlighting some of the areas of controversy, with the aim of providing some further guidance to practising physicians.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite recent updates to the ACC/AHA UA/NSTEMI guidelines, additional factors need to be taken into consideration in the management of UA/NSTEMI patients. Integrating initial responses with early or selectively invasive strategies and the risks of complications in subsequent procedures require careful consideration. Protocol development within an institution is required to risk-stratify patients rapidly, provide optimum precatheterisation medical management and allow seamless and rapid transitions to the catheterisation laboratory in patients at risk for adverse events.

Active drug safety surveillance: a tool to improve public health

PURPOSE

Ensuring that drugs have an acceptable safety profile and are used safely is a major public health priority. The Centers for Education and Research on Therapeutics (CERTs) convened experts from academia, government, and industry to assess strategies to increase the speed and predictive value of generating and evaluating safety signals, and to identify next steps to improve the US system for identifying and evaluating potential safety signals.

METHODS

The CERTs convened a think tank comprising representatives of the groups noted above to address these goals.

RESULTS

Participants observed that, with the increasing availability of electronic health data, opportunities have emerged to more accurately characterize and confirm potential safety issues. The gain for public health from a highly coordinated network of population-based databases for active surveillance is great and within reach, although operational questions remain. A collaborative network must create a working definition of a safety signal, screening algorithms, and criteria and strategies to confirm or refute a signal once identified through screening. Guidelines are needed for when and how to communicate a signal exists and is being evaluated, as well as the outcome of that evaluation.

CONCLUSION

A public-private partnership to create a network of government and private databases to routinely evaluate and prioritize safety questions is in the public interest. Better methods are needed, and a knowledgeable workforce is required to conduct the surveillance and understand how to interpret the results. The international community will benefit from the availability of better methods and more experts.

2007 update to the ACC/AHA guidelines for the management of patients with unstable angina and non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: implications for emergency department practice

The American College of Cardiology and American Heart Association have updated their guidelines for the management of non-ST-segment-elevation acute coronary syndrome for the first time since 2002. In the interim, several important studies affecting choices of therapy potentially begun in the emergency department have been completed, and care patterns have changed and matured significantly. In this review, we present the new recommendations that are pertinent to emergency medicine practice and comment on their potential implementation into an evidence-based, multidisciplinary approach to the evaluation and management of this challenging patient population.

Pharmacologic therapeutics for cardiac reperfusion injury

Cardiovascular disease is the leading cause of morbidity and mortality in industrial societies, with myocardial infarction as the primary assassin. Pharmacologic agents, including the myocardial cell membrane receptor agonists adenosine, bradykinin/angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, opioids and erythropoietin or the mixed cell membrane and intracellular agonists, glucose insulin potassium, and volatile anesthetics, either clinically or experimentally reduce the extent of myocardial injury when administered just prior to reperfusion. Agents that specifically target proteins, transcription factors or ion channels, including PKC agonists/antagonists, PPAR, Phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitors, 3-Hydroxy-3-methyl glutaryl coenzyme A reductase and the ATP-dependent potassium channel are also promising. However, no agent has been specifically approved to reduce reperfusion injury clinically. In this review, we will discuss the advantages and limitations of agents to combat reperfusion injury, their market development status and findings reported in both clinical and preclinical studies. The molecular pathways activated by these agents that preserve myocardium from reperfusion injury, which appear to commonly involve glycogen synthase kinase 3beta and mitochondrial permeability transition pore inhibition, are also described.

Potent mitochondria-targeted peptides reduce myocardial infarction in rats

OBJECTIVE

Previously, we demonstrated that a novel opiate peptide, 2',6'-dimethyl-tyrosine-D-Arg-Phe-Lys-NH2, provided cardioprotection against myocardial stunning in vivo. We subsequently showed that this peptide targeted mitochondria and can scavenge reactive oxygen species. The objective of this study was to determine the role of opioid versus antioxidant activity in cardioprotection.

METHODS

We compared two mitochondria-targeted peptide analogs that lacked opioid activity: SS-31 (D-Arg-2',6'-dimethyl-tyrosine-Lys-Phe-NH2) and SS-20 (Phe-D-Arg-Phe-Lys-NH2). They differ in that only SS-31 has scavenging ability. Rats (n=8/group) were randomized to SS-31, SS-20 or placebo. The drugs (3 mg/kg) or saline was administered intraperitoneally 30 min before ligation of the left anterior descending artery for 60 min, and another dose given intraperitoneally 5 min before reperfusion for 60 min. Study endpoints included myocardial infarct size, cardiac arrhythmia and myocardial lipid peroxidation.

RESULTS

The area at risk was similar among the groups. The infarct area/area at risk, however, was significantly smaller in the treatment groups (53.9+/-1.1% in SS-31 group, 47.1+/-1.4% in SS-20 group, versus 59.9+/-1% in the controls, P<0.01). Lipid peroxidation was significantly reduced by both SS-31 and SS-20 treatment. Arrhythmia occurred only during the early period of coronary occlusion and was less frequent and less severe in the peptide treatment groups than in the controls (Lambeth score 5 points, 3 points, versus 13 points in the controls, P<0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

This study shows that pretreatment with both SS-31 and SS-20 significantly reduced myocardial lipid peroxidation and infarct size in ischemia-reperfusion injury, and suggests that the cardioprotective properties of 2',6'-dimethyl-tyrosine-D-Arg-Phe-Lys-NH2 was primarily mediated by its antioxidant properties. As SS-20 does not scavenge reactive oxygen species, it most likely reduces reactive oxygen species production during ischemia-reperfusion.

Reperfusion strategies in the emergency treatment of ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction

Prompt restoration of blood flow is the primary treatment goal in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction to optimize clinical outcomes. The ED plays a critical role in rapid triage, diagnosis, and management of ST-elevation myocardial infarction, and in the decision about which of the 2 recommended reperfusion options, that is, pharmacologic and mechanical (catheter-based) strategies, to undertake. Guidelines recommend percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) if the medical contact-to-balloon time can be kept under 90 minutes, and timely administration of fibrinolytics if greater than 90 minutes. Most US hospitals do not have PCI facilities, which means the decision becomes whether to treat with a fibrinolytic agent, transfer, or both, followed by PCI if needed. Whichever reperfusion approach is used, successful treatment depends on the ED having an integrated and efficient protocol that is followed with haste. Protocols should be regularly reviewed to accommodate changes in clinical practice arising from ongoing clinical trials.

The contribution of opiate analgesics to the development of infectious complications in burn patients

BACKGROUND

Immune and infectious complications are associated with burn injury. Opiate analgesics also can induce similar complications, however, their impact on postburn infectious complications is unknown.

METHODS

A retrospective survey of records from 1997 to 2002 from an academic burn center was conducted. Information on all opiate analgesic use was obtained and expressed as opiate equivalents (OEs). Total OEs were summed for each patient and then compared between cases and controls.

RESULTS

Patients who developed infections were more likely to be in the high OE group. This association was modified by burn severity. Patients with small burns and infection were more likely to be in the high OE group, whereas patients with moderate to large burns and infections were not associated significantly with opiate use.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this preliminary study suggest that opiate analgesics can contribute to the development of postburn infectious complications when the burn injury is of a less severe nature.

Pathogenesis and early management of non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes

NSTE ACS is a clinically significant problem. Endothelial dysfunction triggered by traditional cardiovascular risk factors (and perhaps by other as yet unidentified risks) in the susceptible host leads to the formation and development of atherosclerotic plaque. Inflammatory mediators and mechanical stresses contribute to plaque rupture by disrupting the protective fibrous cap. In about 25% of patients who have ACS, typically those who are younger, female, or smokers, plaque erosion seems to be the main underlying pathologic mechanism. Endothelial alteration, inflammation,or exposure of the lipid core results in the release of TF, vWF, and PAF. The release of these factors leads to platelet activation and aggregation as well as to the formation of a fibrin clot, resulting in arterial thrombosis that occludes the vessel. A variety of factors, including circulating catecholamines, LDL levels, blood glucose levels, and systemic thrombogenic factors, can affect the extent and stability of the thrombus, thereby determining whether the occlusion is complete and fixed, labile and nonocclusive (NSTE ACS),or clinically silent resulting in a mural thrombus and plaque growth. The acute treatment of NSTEACS is directed at interrupting the prothrombotic environment surrounding the ruptured plaque; thus, antiplatelet agents such as aspirin, clopidogrel, and glycoprotein IIb/IIla receptor antagonists,as well as anticoagulants such as heparin, are the mainstays of early therapy.

Initial approach to the patient who has chest pain

The last decade has seen extraordinary advances in the cardiovascular arena, particularly in the evaluation and management of the patient who has acute coronary syndromes. From bedside markers of myocardial damage to drug-eluting stents, technical advances are proliferating. Efforts in developing an international registry for acute aortic dissection have helped elucidate the acute presentation, management, and prognosis of this uncommon but lethal disease. Finally, the multiple research efforts in coordinating clinical decision-making with serologic markers and advanced imaging for the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism is changing the approach to the patient at risk for thromboembolic disease.

Emergency revascularization in patients with cardiogenic shock on admission: a report from the SHOCK trial and registry

AIMS

To determine clinical correlates and optimal treatment strategy in patients with cardiogenic shock (CS) on admission.

METHODS AND RESULTS

In SHould we emergently revascularize Occluded Coronaries in cardiogenic shocK? (SHOCK) trial and registry patients with left ventricular (LV) dysfunction (n=1053), CS on admission occurred in 26% of directly admitted patients (n=166/627). Time from myocardial infarction to CS was shorter, initial haemodynamic profile poorer, and aggressive treatment less frequent in CS on admission than in delayed CS patients. CS on admission patients constituted a smaller relative proportion (11%) of the transferred (n=48/426) when compared with the directly admitted cohort (P<0.001). In-hospital mortality was higher (75 vs. 56%; P<0.001) with more rapid death (24-h mortality 40 vs. 17%; P<0.001) in CS on admission than in delayed CS patients. Emergency revascularization reduced in-hospital mortality in CS on admission (60 vs. 82%; P=0.001) and in delayed CS patients similarly (46 vs. 62%; P<0.001; interaction P=0.25). After adjustment for clinical differences, CS on admission was an independent predictor of in-hospital mortality (P=0.008).

CONCLUSION

CS on admission patients have a worse outcome but benefit equally from emergency revascularization as delayed CS patients, emphasizing the need for rapid and direct access of CS on admission patients to facilities providing this care.

Medications for the treatment of acute coronary syndromes

Patients presenting with acute coronary syndromes without ST elevation on their electrocardiogram continue to contribute an important healthcare burden. Medical treatments to control symptoms include nitrates and beta-blockers. Morphine is a very effective analgesic although its use may be associated with adverse outcomes. Oral antiplatelet therapies including aspirin and clopidogrel form a cornerstone of prognostically modifying therapy. Similarly, the intravenous IIb/IIIa antagonists have emerged as having an important role in patients undergoing coronary intervention. Low molecular weight heparins are more convenient to use than unfractionated heparin and may be more effective. Care should be taken to avoid mixing the two antithrombins as this contributes to increased bleeding risk. Statins can impact on short-term outcomes when given during the acute admission; and this benefit is augmented if high doses are used.