NCT00442949: ABOARD: immediate versus next-day coronary intervention

ABOARD randomized 352 high-risk patients with non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndromes to immediate versus next-working-day invasive intervention. This was a comparison between hospital treatment strategies after assessment, not between seeking emergency care and waiting at home. 1 2

The primary endpoint, peak troponin I, did not differ significantly: median 2.1 versus 1.7 ng/mL; P=.70. The key thirty-day composite of death, myocardial infarction, or urgent revascularization occurred in 13.7% versus 10.2%; P=.31, also not a statistically significant difference. 2

The findings do not prove the strategies are identical for every patient or every risk group. They also do not apply as permission to delay assessment of new chest pain, ongoing ischemia, or clinical instability. 2

Sources

1. ClinicalTrials.gov — ClinicalTrials.gov — NCT00442949. Original study registration: sponsor, design, population, endpoints and dated history.Original study registration · Original record checked against the registry API. Checked 2026-10-10. Registration and current registry fields do not by themselves establish efficacy. Historical details in the article retain their stated date. Supplied note: ClinicalTrials.gov — NCT00442949. Original study registration: sponsor, design, population, endpoints and dated history.

2. PubMed — Original ABOARD randomized trial: Montalescot et al., JAMA 2009Research publication · Publication abstract read via Europe PMC; identifier and title cross-checked. Checked 2026-10-10. Full paper was not independently re-read for this update; abstract details should not be extended beyond what it reports.