JOURNAL ARTICLE
MULTICENTER STUDY
OBSERVATIONAL STUDY
RESEARCH SUPPORT, NON-U.S. GOV'T
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Long-term follow-up of antithrombotic management patterns in patients with acute coronary syndrome in Russia: an observational study (EPICOR-RUS study).

OBJECTIVE: This study sought to describe the short- and long-term (up to 2 years) antithrombotic management patterns in a real-life setting for patients hospitalized for an acute coronary syndrome (ACS) event, and to document clinical outcomes.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: EPICOR-RUS was a multicenter (34 centers), prospective, observational, longitudinal cohort study conducted across Russia on antithrombotic management in hospitalized (within 24 hours of symptom onset) ACS patients with 2 year follow-up.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01373957.

RESULTS: A total of 600 ACS patients (71.1% male, mean age 60 years) were enrolled; 599 were included for analysis. Diagnosis comprised STEMI (n = 375, 62.6%), NSTEMI (n = 147, 24.5%), and unstable angina (UA) (n = 77, 12.9%). Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) was conducted in 64.3% of patients with STEMI (with or without thrombolysis), 36.7% with NSTEMI, and 58.4% with UA. There was undertreatment with dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) for STEMI, NSTEMI, and UA: 14.7%, 25.9% and 16.9% of patients, respectively, were not receiving DAPT during hospitalization, and 10.1%, 21.8% and 16.9% at discharge. Post-discharge, of the STEMI group, only 72.4% of patients who were managed by PCI and 39.8% of conservatively treated patients received DAPT at 12 months. The respective figures in the NSTEMI group were 77.3% and 26.4%. In the STEMI cohort the cumulative incidence of all-cause mortality was 3.2% at 1 year and 5.1% at 2 years of follow-up; in the NSTEMI cohort this was 2.7% and 4.8%, respectively. There were no deaths by 12 months and one death by 24 months (1.3%) in the UA population.

CONCLUSION: Despite evidence-based guidelines for the management of ACS, the real-world setting in Russia shows discrepancies in clinical practice, highlighting the need for improvements for the optimal management of high-risk patients with ACS.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app