Journal of the American College of Cardiology · 2026
Protocol-Based Implementation of Early Intensive Lipid Management After Acute Coronary Syndrome: The BRIDGE Trial.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Oyama Kazuma, Takahashi Jun, Funaki Takahiro, Oyamada Shunsuke, Horiguchi Satoru, Nakamura Akihiro, Yagi Takuya, Ogata Kazunori, Yahagi Hirokazu, Iwabuchi Kaoru, Namiuchi Shigeto, Tomioka Tomoko, Sugi Masafumi, Yasuda Satoshi, BRIDGE Investigators
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Although guideline-recommended intensive lipid-lowering therapy (LLT) reduces recurrent cardiovascular events after acute coronary syndrome (ACS), timely implementation of intensive LLT and achievement of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) target remain suboptimal in routine clinical practice.
OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to determine whether a protocol-based implementation strategy improves timely achievement of guideline-recommended LDL-C target after ACS.
METHODS: We conducted a cluster-randomized trial involving patients with ACS. Ten centers were randomly assigned 1:1 to protocol-based or standard lipid management. In the protocol-based group, LLT was initiated or intensified during the index hospitalization according to a prespecified algorithm based on baseline LLT status and LDL-C levels using high-intensity statins, ezetimibe, and PCSK9 inhibitors. LDL-C was reassessed at 4 weeks, with treatment escalation when indicated. In the protocol-based group, an LDL-C level of approximately 55 mg/dL was used as the protocol-specified operational threshold for intensification, whereas LDL-C <70 mg/dL was the treatment goal in both groups. The primary and key secondary endpoints were achievement of LDL-C <70 mg/dL and <55 mg/dL at 6 months, respectively.
RESULTS: Between November 2024 and July 2025, 330 patients were enrolled, and 329 patients comprised the study population after 1 patient withdrew consent. The primary efficacy analysis included 315 patients with complete 6-month LDL-C data. Baseline characteristics were balanced between groups. The mean age was 69 years, 18% were women, and the median LDL-C level was 110 mg/dL. At 6 months, LDL-C <70 mg/dL was achieved in 86.4% vs 73.7% (between-group difference, 12.6 percentage points [95% CI: 3.8-21.5 percentage points]; P = 0.005); the corresponding difference was 12.8 percentage points (95% CI: -2.0 to 27.6 percentage points; P = 0.08) in a hospital-level sensitivity analysis. Similar findings were observed for LDL-C <55 mg/dL (60.8% vs 34.5%; between-group difference, 26.3 percentage points [95% CI: 18.5-34.0 percentage points]; P < 0.001). At 6 months, use of high-intensity statins, ezetimibe, and PCSK9 inhibitors was higher in the protocol-based group.
CONCLUSIONS: A protocol-based implementation strategy for early intensive LLT significantly improved achievement of the guideline-recommended LDL-C target after ACS. These findings support a structured, algorithm-based care pathway to facilitate timely initiation and intensification of LLT and improve implementation of guideline-recommended lipid management in routine clinical practice. (Brief and Protocol-Based Intensive Lipid Management in Patients with Acute Coronary Syndrome; jRCT1020240029).
OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to determine whether a protocol-based implementation strategy improves timely achievement of guideline-recommended LDL-C target after ACS.
METHODS: We conducted a cluster-randomized trial involving patients with ACS. Ten centers were randomly assigned 1:1 to protocol-based or standard lipid management. In the protocol-based group, LLT was initiated or intensified during the index hospitalization according to a prespecified algorithm based on baseline LLT status and LDL-C levels using high-intensity statins, ezetimibe, and PCSK9 inhibitors. LDL-C was reassessed at 4 weeks, with treatment escalation when indicated. In the protocol-based group, an LDL-C level of approximately 55 mg/dL was used as the protocol-specified operational threshold for intensification, whereas LDL-C <70 mg/dL was the treatment goal in both groups. The primary and key secondary endpoints were achievement of LDL-C <70 mg/dL and <55 mg/dL at 6 months, respectively.
RESULTS: Between November 2024 and July 2025, 330 patients were enrolled, and 329 patients comprised the study population after 1 patient withdrew consent. The primary efficacy analysis included 315 patients with complete 6-month LDL-C data. Baseline characteristics were balanced between groups. The mean age was 69 years, 18% were women, and the median LDL-C level was 110 mg/dL. At 6 months, LDL-C <70 mg/dL was achieved in 86.4% vs 73.7% (between-group difference, 12.6 percentage points [95% CI: 3.8-21.5 percentage points]; P = 0.005); the corresponding difference was 12.8 percentage points (95% CI: -2.0 to 27.6 percentage points; P = 0.08) in a hospital-level sensitivity analysis. Similar findings were observed for LDL-C <55 mg/dL (60.8% vs 34.5%; between-group difference, 26.3 percentage points [95% CI: 18.5-34.0 percentage points]; P < 0.001). At 6 months, use of high-intensity statins, ezetimibe, and PCSK9 inhibitors was higher in the protocol-based group.
CONCLUSIONS: A protocol-based implementation strategy for early intensive LLT significantly improved achievement of the guideline-recommended LDL-C target after ACS. These findings support a structured, algorithm-based care pathway to facilitate timely initiation and intensification of LLT and improve implementation of guideline-recommended lipid management in routine clinical practice. (Brief and Protocol-Based Intensive Lipid Management in Patients with Acute Coronary Syndrome; jRCT1020240029).