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

Background Older adults with non–ST‐segment–elevation acute coronary syndrome are less likely to undergo an invasive strategy compared with younger patients. Randomized controlled trials traditionally exclude older adults because of their high burden of geriatric conditions. Methods and Results We s...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Amit Rout, Mohamad B. Moumneh, Kriti Kalra, Sahib Singh, Aakash Garg, Vijay Kunadian, Simone Biscaglia, Mohamad A. Alkhouli, Jennifer A. Rymer, Wayne B. Batchelor, Michael G. Nanna, Abdulla A. Damluji
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Wiley 2024-11-01
Series:Journal of the American Heart Association: Cardiovascular and Cerebrovascular Disease
Subjects:
Online Access:https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/JAHA.124.036151
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1850265647152365568
author Amit Rout
Mohamad B. Moumneh
Kriti Kalra
Sahib Singh
Aakash Garg
Vijay Kunadian
Simone Biscaglia
Mohamad A. Alkhouli
Jennifer A. Rymer
Wayne B. Batchelor
Michael G. Nanna
Abdulla A. Damluji
author_facet Amit Rout
Mohamad B. Moumneh
Kriti Kalra
Sahib Singh
Aakash Garg
Vijay Kunadian
Simone Biscaglia
Mohamad A. Alkhouli
Jennifer A. Rymer
Wayne B. Batchelor
Michael G. Nanna
Abdulla A. Damluji
author_sort Amit Rout
collection DOAJ
description Background Older adults with non–ST‐segment–elevation acute coronary syndrome are less likely to undergo an invasive strategy compared with younger patients. Randomized controlled trials traditionally exclude older adults because of their high burden of geriatric conditions. Methods and Results We searched for randomized controlled trials comparing invasive versus medical management or a selective invasive (conservative) strategy for older patients (age≥75 years) with non–ST‐segment–elevation acute coronary syndrome. Fixed effects meta‐analysis was conducted to estimate the odds ratio (OR) with 95% CI for the composite of death or myocardial infarction (MI) and individual secondary end points of all‐cause death, cardiovascular death, MI, revascularization, stroke, and major bleeding. Nine studies with 2429 patients (invasive: 1228 versus control: 1201) with a mean follow‐up of 21 months were included. An invasive strategy was associated with a significantly decreased risk of a composite of death and MI (OR, 0.67 [95% CI, 0.54–0.83], P<0.001), MI (OR, 0.56 [95% CI, 0.45–0.70], P<0.001) and subsequent revascularization (OR, 0.27 [95% CI, 0.16–0.48], P<0.001). There was no difference in all‐cause death (OR, 0.84 [95% CI, 0.65–1.10], P=0.21), cardiovascular death (OR, 0.85 [95% CI, 0.63–1.15], P=0.30), stroke (OR, 0.74 [95% CI, 0.38–1.47], P=0.39), or major bleeding (OR, 1.24 [95% CI, 0.42–3.66], P=0.70). Conclusions In older patients ≥75 years old with non–ST‐segment–elevation acute coronary syndrome, an invasive strategy reduced the risk of a composite of death and MI, MI, and subsequent revascularization compared with a conservative strategy alone. Older adults with higher burden of geriatric conditions should be included in future trials to improve generalizability to this growing population.
format Article
id doaj-art-9fbdc8da87c14b5b8933b476fa112161
institution OA Journals
issn 2047-9980
language English
publishDate 2024-11-01
publisher Wiley
record_format Article
series Journal of the American Heart Association: Cardiovascular and Cerebrovascular Disease
spelling doaj-art-9fbdc8da87c14b5b8933b476fa1121612025-08-20T01:54:22ZengWileyJournal of the American Heart Association: Cardiovascular and Cerebrovascular Disease2047-99802024-11-01132110.1161/JAHA.124.036151Invasive 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 TrialsAmit Rout0Mohamad B. Moumneh1Kriti Kalra2Sahib Singh3Aakash Garg4Vijay Kunadian5Simone Biscaglia6Mohamad A. Alkhouli7Jennifer A. Rymer8Wayne B. Batchelor9Michael G. Nanna10Abdulla A. Damluji11Division of Cardiology University of Louisville Louisville KY USAInova Center of Outcomes Research Falls Church VA USAInova Center of Outcomes Research Falls Church VA USADepartment of Medicine Sinai Hospital of Baltimore Baltimore MD USADivision of Cardiology Ellis Hospital Schenectady NY USATranslational and Clinical Research Institute, Faculty of Medical Sciences Newcastle University Newcastle upon Tyne United KingdomAzienda Ospedaliero‐Universitaria di Ferrara Cona FE ItalyDepartment of Cardiology, Mayo Clinic School of Medicine Rochester MN USADuke University School of Medicine Durham NC USAInova Center of Outcomes Research Falls Church VA USAYale University School of Medicine New Haven CT USAInova Center of Outcomes Research Falls Church VA USABackground Older adults with non–ST‐segment–elevation acute coronary syndrome are less likely to undergo an invasive strategy compared with younger patients. Randomized controlled trials traditionally exclude older adults because of their high burden of geriatric conditions. Methods and Results We searched for randomized controlled trials comparing invasive versus medical management or a selective invasive (conservative) strategy for older patients (age≥75 years) with non–ST‐segment–elevation acute coronary syndrome. Fixed effects meta‐analysis was conducted to estimate the odds ratio (OR) with 95% CI for the composite of death or myocardial infarction (MI) and individual secondary end points of all‐cause death, cardiovascular death, MI, revascularization, stroke, and major bleeding. Nine studies with 2429 patients (invasive: 1228 versus control: 1201) with a mean follow‐up of 21 months were included. An invasive strategy was associated with a significantly decreased risk of a composite of death and MI (OR, 0.67 [95% CI, 0.54–0.83], P<0.001), MI (OR, 0.56 [95% CI, 0.45–0.70], P<0.001) and subsequent revascularization (OR, 0.27 [95% CI, 0.16–0.48], P<0.001). There was no difference in all‐cause death (OR, 0.84 [95% CI, 0.65–1.10], P=0.21), cardiovascular death (OR, 0.85 [95% CI, 0.63–1.15], P=0.30), stroke (OR, 0.74 [95% CI, 0.38–1.47], P=0.39), or major bleeding (OR, 1.24 [95% CI, 0.42–3.66], P=0.70). Conclusions In older patients ≥75 years old with non–ST‐segment–elevation acute coronary syndrome, an invasive strategy reduced the risk of a composite of death and MI, MI, and subsequent revascularization compared with a conservative strategy alone. Older adults with higher burden of geriatric conditions should be included in future trials to improve generalizability to this growing population.https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/JAHA.124.036151agedcoronary diseasegeriatric assessmentmeta‐analysispercutaneous coronary intervention
spellingShingle Amit Rout
Mohamad B. Moumneh
Kriti Kalra
Sahib Singh
Aakash Garg
Vijay Kunadian
Simone Biscaglia
Mohamad A. Alkhouli
Jennifer A. Rymer
Wayne B. Batchelor
Michael G. Nanna
Abdulla A. Damluji
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
Journal of the American Heart Association: Cardiovascular and Cerebrovascular Disease
aged
coronary disease
geriatric assessment
meta‐analysis
percutaneous coronary intervention
title 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
title_full 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
title_fullStr 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
title_full_unstemmed 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
title_short 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
title_sort 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
topic aged
coronary disease
geriatric assessment
meta‐analysis
percutaneous coronary intervention
url https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/JAHA.124.036151
work_keys_str_mv AT amitrout invasiveversusconservativestrategyinolderadults75yearsofagewithnonstsegmentelevationacutecoronarysyndromeasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials
AT mohamadbmoumneh invasiveversusconservativestrategyinolderadults75yearsofagewithnonstsegmentelevationacutecoronarysyndromeasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials
AT kritikalra invasiveversusconservativestrategyinolderadults75yearsofagewithnonstsegmentelevationacutecoronarysyndromeasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials
AT sahibsingh invasiveversusconservativestrategyinolderadults75yearsofagewithnonstsegmentelevationacutecoronarysyndromeasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials
AT aakashgarg invasiveversusconservativestrategyinolderadults75yearsofagewithnonstsegmentelevationacutecoronarysyndromeasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials
AT vijaykunadian invasiveversusconservativestrategyinolderadults75yearsofagewithnonstsegmentelevationacutecoronarysyndromeasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials
AT simonebiscaglia invasiveversusconservativestrategyinolderadults75yearsofagewithnonstsegmentelevationacutecoronarysyndromeasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials
AT mohamadaalkhouli invasiveversusconservativestrategyinolderadults75yearsofagewithnonstsegmentelevationacutecoronarysyndromeasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials
AT jenniferarymer invasiveversusconservativestrategyinolderadults75yearsofagewithnonstsegmentelevationacutecoronarysyndromeasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials
AT waynebbatchelor invasiveversusconservativestrategyinolderadults75yearsofagewithnonstsegmentelevationacutecoronarysyndromeasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials
AT michaelgnanna invasiveversusconservativestrategyinolderadults75yearsofagewithnonstsegmentelevationacutecoronarysyndromeasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials
AT abdullaadamluji invasiveversusconservativestrategyinolderadults75yearsofagewithnonstsegmentelevationacutecoronarysyndromeasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials