Invasive Treatment Strategy for Older Patients with Myocardial Infarction
- PMID: 39225274
- DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa2407791
Invasive Treatment Strategy for Older Patients with Myocardial Infarction
Abstract
Background: Whether a conservative strategy of medical therapy alone or a strategy of medical therapy plus invasive treatment is more beneficial in older adults with non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) remains unclear.
Methods: We conducted a prospective, multicenter, randomized trial involving patients 75 years of age or older with NSTEMI at 48 sites in the United Kingdom. The patients were assigned in a 1:1 ratio to a conservative strategy of the best available medical therapy or an invasive strategy of coronary angiography and revascularization plus the best available medical therapy. Patients who were frail or had a high burden of coexisting conditions were eligible. The primary outcome was a composite of death from cardiovascular causes (cardiovascular death) or nonfatal myocardial infarction assessed in a time-to-event analysis.
Results: A total of 1518 patients underwent randomization; 753 patients were assigned to the invasive-strategy group and 765 to the conservative-strategy group. The mean age of the patients was 82 years, 45% were women, and 32% were frail. A primary-outcome event occurred in 193 patients (25.6%) in the invasive-strategy group and 201 patients (26.3%) in the conservative-strategy group (hazard ratio, 0.94; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.77 to 1.14; P = 0.53) over a median follow-up of 4.1 years. Cardiovascular death occurred in 15.8% of the patients in the invasive-strategy group and 14.2% of the patients in the conservative-strategy group (hazard ratio, 1.11; 95% CI, 0.86 to 1.44). Nonfatal myocardial infarction occurred in 11.7% in the invasive-strategy group and 15.0% in the conservative-strategy group (hazard ratio, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.57 to 0.99). Procedural complications occurred in less than 1% of the patients.
Conclusions: In older adults with NSTEMI, an invasive strategy did not result in a significantly lower risk of cardiovascular death or nonfatal myocardial infarction (the composite primary outcome) than a conservative strategy over a median follow-up of 4.1 years. (Funded by the British Heart Foundation; BHF SENIOR-RITA ISRCTN Registry number, ISRCTN11343602.).
Copyright © 2024 Massachusetts Medical Society.
Similar articles
-
Invasive versus conservative strategy in patients aged 80 years or older with non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction or unstable angina pectoris (After Eighty study): an open-label randomised controlled trial.Lancet. 2016 Mar 12;387(10023):1057-1065. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(15)01166-6. Epub 2016 Jan 13. Lancet. 2016. PMID: 26794722 Clinical Trial.
-
Invasive Versus Conservative Strategy in Older Adults ≥75 Years of Age With Non-ST-segment-Elevation Acute Coronary Syndrome: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.J Am Heart Assoc. 2024 Nov 5;13(21):e036151. doi: 10.1161/JAHA.124.036151. Epub 2024 Nov 4. J Am Heart Assoc. 2024. PMID: 39494560
-
Rationale and design of the DEAR-OLD trial: Randomized evaluation of routinely Deferred versus EARly invasive strategy in elderly patients of 75 years or OLDer with non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction.Am Heart J. 2018 Feb;196:65-73. doi: 10.1016/j.ahj.2017.10.022. Epub 2017 Nov 5. Am Heart J. 2018. PMID: 29421016
-
Early invasive versus conservative strategies for unstable angina and non-ST elevation myocardial infarction in the stent era.Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010 Mar 17;(3):CD004815. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD004815.pub3. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010. Update in: Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016 May 26;(5):CD004815. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD004815.pub4 PMID: 20238333 Updated. Review.
-
Timing of Coronary Invasive Strategy in Non-ST-Segment Elevation Acute Coronary Syndromes and Clinical Outcomes: An Updated Meta-Analysis.JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2016 Nov 28;9(22):2267-2276. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2016.09.017. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2016. PMID: 27884352 Review.
Cited by
-
TAVI patients with bystander coronary artery disease should receive PCI: pros and cons.EuroIntervention. 2024 Nov 18;20(22):1366-1369. doi: 10.4244/EIJ-E-24-00054. EuroIntervention. 2024. PMID: 39552486 No abstract available.
-
The Emerging Potential of Apolipoprotein C-III Inhibition for ASCVD Prevention: A State-of-the-Art Review.Curr Atheroscler Rep. 2024 Nov 14;27(1):3. doi: 10.1007/s11883-024-01258-8. Curr Atheroscler Rep. 2024. PMID: 39541062 Review.
-
Management of Acute Coronary Syndrome in Elderly Patients: A Narrative Review through Decisional Crossroads.J Clin Med. 2024 Oct 10;13(20):6034. doi: 10.3390/jcm13206034. J Clin Med. 2024. PMID: 39457985 Free PMC article. Review.
Publication types
MeSH terms
Associated data
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources