Juan Sanchis1, Eduardo Núñez2, José Antonio Barrabés3, Francisco Marín4, Luciano Consuegra-Sánchez5, Silvia Ventura2, Ernesto Valero2, Mercè Roqué6, Antoni Bayés-Genís7, Bruno García Del Blanco3, Irene Dégano8, Julio Núñez2. 1. Department of Cardiology, Hospital Clínico Universitario, INCLIVA, Universitat de València, Valencia, Spain. Electronic address: sanchis_juafor@gva.es. 2. Department of Cardiology, Hospital Clínico Universitario, INCLIVA, Universitat de València, Valencia, Spain. 3. Department of Cardiology, Hospital Universitari Vall d'Hebrón, VHIR, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain. 4. Department of Cardiology, Hospital Virgen Arrixaca, Murcia, Spain. 5. Department of Cardiology, Hospital Santa Lucía, Cartagena, Spain. 6. Department of Cardiology, Hospital Clinic, Barcelona, Spain. 7. Department of Cardiology, Hospital Universitari Germans Trias i Pujol, Badalona, Spain. 8. IMIM (Hospital del Mar Medical Research Institute), Universitat Autonoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Comorbid elderly patients with non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction (non-STEMI) are underrepresented in randomized trials and undergo fewer cardiac catheterizations according to registries. Our aim was to compare the conservative and invasive strategies in these patients. METHODS: Randomized multicenter study, including 106 patients (January 2012-March 2014) with non-STEMI, over 70years and with comorbidities defined by at least two of the following: peripheral artery disease, cerebral vascular disease, dementia, chronic pulmonary disease, chronic renal failure or anemia. Patients were randomized to invasive (routine coronary angiogram, n=52) or conservative (coronary angiogram only if recurrent ischemia or heart failure, n=54) strategy. Medical treatment was identical. The main endpoint was the composite of all-cause mortality, reinfarction and readmission for cardiac cause (postdischarge revascularization or heart failure), at long-term (2.5-year follow-up). Analysis of cumulative event rate (incidence rate ratio=IRR) and time to first event (hazard ratio=HR), were performed. RESULTS:Cardiac catheterization/revascularization rates were 100%/58% in the invasive versus 20%/9% in the conservative arm. There were no differences between groups in the main endpoint (invasive vs conservative: IRR=0.946, 95% CI 0.466-1.918, p=0.877) at long-term. The invasive strategy, however, tended to improve 3-month outcomes in terms of mortality (HR=0.348, 95% CI 0.122-0.991, p=0.048), and of mortality or ischemic events (reinfarction or postdischarge revascularization) (HR=0.432, 95% CI 0.190-0.984, p=0.046). This benefit declined during follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Invasive management did not modify long-term outcome in comorbid elderly patients with non-STEMI. The finding of a tendency towards an improvement in the short-term needs confirmation in larger studies (clinicaltrials.govNCT1645943).
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Comorbid elderly patients with non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction (non-STEMI) are underrepresented in randomized trials and undergo fewer cardiac catheterizations according to registries. Our aim was to compare the conservative and invasive strategies in these patients. METHODS: Randomized multicenter study, including 106 patients (January 2012-March 2014) with non-STEMI, over 70years and with comorbidities defined by at least two of the following: peripheral artery disease, cerebral vascular disease, dementia, chronic pulmonary disease, chronic renal failure or anemia. Patients were randomized to invasive (routine coronary angiogram, n=52) or conservative (coronary angiogram only if recurrent ischemia or heart failure, n=54) strategy. Medical treatment was identical. The main endpoint was the composite of all-cause mortality, reinfarction and readmission for cardiac cause (postdischarge revascularization or heart failure), at long-term (2.5-year follow-up). Analysis of cumulative event rate (incidence rate ratio=IRR) and time to first event (hazard ratio=HR), were performed. RESULTS: Cardiac catheterization/revascularization rates were 100%/58% in the invasive versus 20%/9% in the conservative arm. There were no differences between groups in the main endpoint (invasive vs conservative: IRR=0.946, 95% CI 0.466-1.918, p=0.877) at long-term. The invasive strategy, however, tended to improve 3-month outcomes in terms of mortality (HR=0.348, 95% CI 0.122-0.991, p=0.048), and of mortality or ischemic events (reinfarction or postdischarge revascularization) (HR=0.432, 95% CI 0.190-0.984, p=0.046). This benefit declined during follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Invasive management did not modify long-term outcome in comorbid elderly patients with non-STEMI. The finding of a tendency towards an improvement in the short-term needs confirmation in larger studies (clinicaltrials.govNCT1645943).
Authors: Nuccia Morici; Gianfranco Alicandro; Luca A Ferri; Luigi Piatti; Daniele Grosseto; Paolo Sganzerla; Giovanni Tortorella; Maurizio Ferrario; Gabriele Crimi; Irene Bossi; Stefano Tondi; Anna Sonia Petronio; Matteo Mariani; Anna Toso; Amelia Ravera; Elena Corrada; Davide Cao; Leonardo Di Ascenzo; Carlo La Vecchia; Stefano De Servi; Stefano Savonitto Journal: CJC Open Date: 2020-03-20
Authors: Matthew M Y Lee; Mark C Petrie; Paul Rocchiccioli; Joanne Simpson; Colette E Jackson; David S Corcoran; Kenneth Mangion; Ammani Brown; Pio Cialdella; Novalia P Sidik; Margaret B McEntegart; Aadil Shaukat; Alan P Rae; Stuart H M Hood; Eileen E Peat; Iain N Findlay; Clare L Murphy; Alistair J Cormack; Nikolay B Bukov; Kanarath P Balachandran; Keith G Oldroyd; Ian Ford; Olivia Wu; Alex McConnachie; Sarah J E Barry; Colin Berry Journal: Circ Cardiovasc Interv Date: 2019-07-31 Impact factor: 6.546
Authors: Matthew M Y Lee; Mark C Petrie; Paul Rocchiccioli; Joanne Simpson; Colette E Jackson; David S Corcoran; Kenneth Mangion; Ammani Brown; Pio Cialdella; Novalia P Sidik; Margaret B McEntegart; Aadil Shaukat; Alan P Rae; Stuart H M Hood; Eileen E Peat; Iain N Findlay; Clare L Murphy; Alistair J Cormack; Nikolay B Bukov; Kanarath P Balachandran; Ian Ford; Olivia Wu; Alex McConnachie; Sarah J E Barry; Colin Berry Journal: Open Heart Date: 2021-02
Authors: Fernando F Gonçalves; José P Guimarães; Sara C Borges; Pedro S Mateus; José I Moreira Journal: J Geriatr Cardiol Date: 2020-08 Impact factor: 3.327
Authors: Liza Chacko; James P Howard; Christopher Rajkumar; Alexandra N Nowbar; Christopher Kane; Dina Mahdi; Michael Foley; Matthew Shun-Shin; Graham Cole; Sayan Sen; Rasha Al-Lamee; Darrel P Francis; Yousif Ahmad Journal: Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes Date: 2020-02-17