ABSTRACT
AIMS: The aim was to compare the effect of revascularization to conservative treatment in patients with residual silent and with residual symptomatic ischemia following acute myocardial infarction (AMI). The study was a subanalysis of the DANAMI (DANish AMI) randomized study of invasive vs. conservative treatment in patients with inducible ischemia after thrombolysis in AMI. METHODS AND RESULTS: One thousand and eight patients were randomized to invasive or conservative treatment, stratified by the type of ischemia: silent, i.e. ST depression during an exercise test prior to discharge in 56%, or symptomatic, i.e. chest pain occurring either spontaneously during admission or during the exercise test, with or without ST changes, in 44%. Compared to a conservative strategy, invasive treatment reduced the incidence of nonfatal reinfarction, after in median 2.4 years, in both symptomatic patients (13.3-7.2%, p < 0.006) and patients with silent ischemia (10.1 vs. 5.7%, p < 0.05), and of admissions with unstable angina in symptomatic (44.5-27.6%, p < 0.0001) and silent ischemia (21.6-13.3%, p < 0.0006). CONCLUSIONS: Compared to conservative strategy, invasive treatment reduces the risk of nonfatal reinfarction and hospital admissions for unstable angina in thrombolyzed post-AMI patients with silent as well as symptomatic exercise-induced ischemia.
