A Randomized Controlled Trial of Nonfasting vs Fasting Before Interventional Coronary Procedures

Fasting before coronary procedures is currently recommended to reduce complications despite the lack of scientific evidence. The TONIC (Comparison Between Fasting and No Fasting Before Interventional Coronary Intervention on the Occurrence of Adverse Events) noninferiority trial investigated the safety and comfort of a nonfasting strategy (ad libitum food and drinks) vs traditional fasting (>6 hours for solid food and liquids) before coronary procedures. In this monocentric, prospective, single-blind randomized controlled trial, 739 patients undergoing coronary procedures were included and randomized to a fasting or a nonfasting strategy. Emergency procedures were excluded. The primary endpoint was a composite of vasovagal reaction, hypoglycemia (defined by blood sugar ≤0.7 g/L), and isolated nausea and/or vomiting. Noninferiority margin was 4%. Secondary endpoints were contrast-induced nephropathy and patients' satisfaction. Among the 739 procedures (697 elective and 42 semiurgent), 517 angiographies, and 222 angioplasties (including complex and high-risk procedures) were performed. The primary endpoint occurred in 30 of 365 nonfasting patients (8.2%) vs 37 of 374 fasting patients (9.9%), demonstrating noninferiority (absolute between-group difference, −1.7%; 1-sided 95% CI upper limit: 1.8%). No food-related adverse event occurred, and contrast-related acute kidney injuries were similar between groups. Overall, procedure satisfaction and perceived pain were similar in both groups, but nonfasting patients reported less hunger and thirst (P < 0.01). In case of redo coronary procedures, most patients (79%) would choose a nonfasting strategy. The TONIC randomized trial demonstrates the noninferiority of a nonfasting strategy to the usual fasting strategy for coronary procedures regarding safety, while improving patients' comfort.