Emergency Medicine Cardiac Research and Education Group




ACTION Registry
ACTION Registry®–GWTG™ is a national, risk-adjusted, outcomes-based quality improvement program that helps participating facilities measure and improve care for high-risk ACS patients with STEMI and NSTEMI. The result of the collaboration between the two leading national coronary artery disease registries, the NCDR® ACTION Registry® and the American Heart Association (AHA) Get With The GuidelinesSM-CAD Registry, ACTION Registry–GWTG will be the largest, most comprehensive national cardiovascular patient database ever developed by the medical profession.

Combining the strengths of the two programs, ACTION Registry–GWTG will collect a comprehensive set of data elements that provide healthcare professionals and their facilities with the information they need to monitor and improve adherence to the most current, science-based ACC/AHA treatment guidelines. Participation will greatly facilitate quality improvement efforts, optimize clinical care, and improve clinical outcomes for acute coronary syndrome patients.

Visit How To Join to request additional information or to download an enrollment package. Or, visit the ACTION website for more information.



Percutaneous coronary interventions for non-acute coronary artery disease: a quantitative 20-year synopsis and a network meta-analysis



Lancet 2009; 373: 911–918 View citation

Background: Over the past 20 years, percutaneous transluminal balloon coronary angioplasty (PTCA), bare-metal stents (BMS), and drug-eluting stents (DES) succeeded each other as catheter-based treatments for coronary artery disease. We undertook a systematic overview of randomised trials comparing these interventions with each other and with medical therapy in patients with non-acute coronary artery disease.

Methods: We searched Medline for trials contrasting at least two of the four interventions (PTCA, BMS, DES, and medical therapy). Eligible outcomes were death, myocardial infarction, coronary artery bypass grafting, target lesion or vessel revascularisation, and any revascularisation. Random effects meta-analyses summarised head-to-head (direct) comparisons, and network meta-analyses integrated direct and indirect evidence.

Findings: 61 eligible trials (25 388 patients) investigated four of six possible comparisons between the four interventions; no trials directly compared DES with medical therapy or PTCA. In all direct or indirect comparisons, succeeding advancements in percutaneous coronary intervention did not produce detectable improvements in deaths or myocardial infarction. The risk ratio (RR) for indirect comparisons between DES and medical therapy was 0·96 (95% CI 0·60—1·52) for death and 1·15 (0·73—1·82) for myocardial infarction. By contrast, we recorded sequential significant reductions in target lesion or vessel revascularisation with BMS compared with PTCA (RR 0·68 [0—60·0·77]) and with DES compared with BMS (0·44 [0·35—0·56]). The RR for the indirect comparison between DES and PTCA for target lesion or vessel revascularisation was 0·30 (0·17—0·51).

Interpretation: Sequential innovations in the catheter-based treatment of non-acute coronary artery disease showed no evidence of an effect on death or myocardial infarction when compared with medical therapy. These results lend support to present recommendations to optimise medical therapy as an initial management strategy in patients with this disease.





Legal information

EMCREG™ - International
4555 Lake Forest Drive
Suite 650
Cincinnati, Ohio 45242

Fell free to contact us toll-free at 1-866-4EMCREG (436-2734)





Advanced Search

2 September 2010
27 August 2010
18 August 2010
9 August 2010
2 August 2010
27 July 2010
19 July 2010
19 July 2010
21 June 2010
18 June 2010
11 June 2010
8 June 2010
8 June 2010
NEWS ARCHIVES:
©Copyright EMCREG-International™. All rights reserved