Related Experiment Video
Updated: Sep 2, 2026

Optimized Management of Endovascular Treatment for Acute Ischemic Stroke
Published on: January 18, 2018
Revascularization not superior to conservative treatment of acute coronary syndromes
1Washington Hospital Family Practice Residency, Pennsylvania, USA. tphillips@washingtonhospital.org
Insights
For acute coronary syndrome, conservative treatment showed similar effectiveness to immediate catheterization and surgery regarding death or heart attack risk. Aggressive treatment reduced refractory angina but required many interventions for limited benefit.
Area of Science:
- Cardiology
- Interventional Cardiology
- Clinical Medicine
Background:
- Acute coronary syndrome (ACS) management often involves immediate invasive strategies.
- Evaluating conservative versus aggressive treatment in ACS is crucial for optimizing patient outcomes and resource allocation.
Discussion:
- The study compared conservative management with immediate catheterization and surgical intervention for ACS.
- No significant differences in mortality or myocardial infarction rates were observed between the groups.
- Aggressive treatment demonstrated a benefit in reducing refractory angina, but with a high number needed to treat (NNT=20).
Key Insights:
- Conservative ACS treatment is a viable alternative to immediate invasive procedures, with comparable safety profiles.
- The benefit of aggressive intervention for refractory angina in ACS may be outweighed by the number of unnecessary procedures performed.
Outlook:
- Further research should explore patient stratification for optimal ACS treatment pathways.
- Cost-effectiveness analyses are needed to balance the benefits of aggressive intervention against procedural risks and healthcare costs.
Abstract:
Conservative treatment was nearly as effective as immediate catheterization and surgical intervention in patients presenting with acute coronary syndrome. No difference was noted in the risk of death or myocardial infarction in either group. Patients were less likely to experience refractory angina when evaluated at 4 months and after 1 year when treated aggressively (numbers needed to treat [NNT]=20). Saving 1 readmission for refractory angina at the cost of performing 19 interventions that have no effect on the patient may not be reasonable.
Related Concept Videos
Coronary Artery Disease V: Interprofessional Care
Acute Coronary Syndrome I: Introduction
Acute Coronary Syndrome III: Diagnostic Studies
Acute Coronary Syndrome IV: Interprofessional Care
Acute Coronary Syndrome V: Nursing Management
Angina IV: Management

