Influence of Race on Death and Ischemic Complications in Patients With Non–ST-Elevation Acute Coronary Syndromes Despite Modern, Protocol-Guided Treatment
- 15 March 2005
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Wolters Kluwer Health in Circulation
- Vol. 111 (10) , 1217-1224
- https://doi.org/10.1161/01.cir.0000157733.50479.b9
Abstract
Background— In the setting of acute coronary syndromes (ACS), nonwhite patients are less likely to undergo invasive cardiac procedures and may have worse clinical outcomes than white patients. Whether the disparate outcomes exist independently of potential biases in treatment patterns remains unclear. Methods and Results— We examined the association between race and outcome in the Treat Angina with Aggrastat and Determine Cost of Therapy With an Invasive or Conservative Strategy–Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction 18 study (TACTICS-TIMI 18), a randomized trial of invasive versus conservative treatment strategy in patients with non–ST-elevation ACS. There were 1722 white and 461 nonwhite patients. After adjustment for differences in medical characteristics, nonwhite patients were at significantly increased risk for death, MI, or rehospitalization for ACS (hazard ratio [HR], 1.54; P =0.003). Rates of protocol-guided angiography and revascularization were similar in both groups. For non–protocol-guided care, however, we found significant disparities, with nonwhite patients less likely to be taking their cardiac medications at follow-up (odds ratio [OR], 0.59; P =0.0002), to undergo non–protocol-mandated angiography (OR, 0.40; P =0.03), to receive a stent if undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (OR, 0.55; P =0.045), and to have less procedural success after percutaneous coronary intervention (acute gain, 1.40±0.83 versus 1.81±0.92 mm; P =0.004). Nonetheless, an invasive strategy was similarly efficacious in white (HR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.50 to 0.88) and nonwhite (HR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.52 to 1.39) patients ( P interaction =0.52), especially in those with troponin elevation or ST deviation. Conclusions— After adjustment for baseline characteristics, nonwhite patients had a significantly worse prognosis than white patients, regardless of treatment approach. In the absence of protocol guidance, important disparities emerged between the care given the 2 groups. An early invasive strategy is beneficial in and should be considered for all patients, regardless of race.Keywords
This publication has 26 references indexed in Scilit:
- Multimarker Approach to Risk Stratification in Non-ST Elevation Acute Coronary SyndromesCirculation, 2002
- Comparison of Early Invasive and Conservative Strategies in Patients with Unstable Coronary Syndromes Treated with the Glycoprotein IIb/IIIa Inhibitor TirofibanNew England Journal of Medicine, 2001
- Applied Logistic RegressionPublished by Wiley ,2000
- Racial differences in the management of unstable angina: Results from the multicenter GUARANTEE registryAmerican Heart Journal, 1999
- Racial Variation in the Use of Coronary-Revascularization Procedures — Are the Differences Real? Do They Matter?New England Journal of Medicine, 1997
- Influence of Race, Sex, and Age on Management of Unstable Angina and Non—Q-Wave Myocardial InfarctionJAMA, 1996
- Racial Differences in the Use of Invasive Cardiovascular Procedures in the Department of Veterans Affairs Medical SystemNew England Journal of Medicine, 1993
- Mortality Rates and Risk Factors for Coronary Disease in Black as Compared with White Men and WomenNew England Journal of Medicine, 1993
- Acute Myocardial Infarction in the Medicare PopulationJAMA, 1992
- Effects of gender and race on prognosis after myocardial infarction: Adverse prognosis for women, particularly black womenJournal of the American College of Cardiology, 1987