TY - JOUR
T1 - Invasive Treatment Strategy for Older Patients with Myocardial Infarction
AU - Kunadian, Vijay
AU - Mossop, Helen
AU - Shields, Carol
AU - Bardgett, Michelle
AU - Watts, Philippa
AU - Teare, M. Dawn
AU - Pritchard, Jonathan
AU - Adams-Hall, Jennifer
AU - Runnett, Craig
AU - Ripley, David P.
AU - Carter, Justin
AU - Quigley, Julie
AU - Cooke, Justin
AU - Austin, David
AU - Murphy, Jerry
AU - Kelly, Damian
AU - McGowan, James
AU - Veerasamy, Murugapathy
AU - Felmeden, Dirk
AU - Contractor, Hussain
AU - Mutgi, Sanjay
AU - Irving, John
AU - Lindsay, Steven
AU - Galasko, Gavin
AU - Lee, Kelvin
AU - Sultan, Ayyaz
AU - Dastidar, Amardeep G.
AU - Hussain, Shazia
AU - Haq, Iftikhar Ul
AU - De Belder, Mark
AU - Denvir, Martin
AU - Flather, Marcus
AU - Storey, Robert F.
AU - Newby, David E.
AU - Pocock, Stuart J.
AU - Fox, Keith A.A.
AU - British Heart Foundation SENIOR-RITA Trial Team and Investigators
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2024 Massachusetts Medical Society.
PY - 2024/10/21
Y1 - 2024/10/21
N2 - 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.
AB - 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.
KW - Acute Coronary Syndromes
KW - Cardiology
KW - Cardiology General
KW - Cardiovascular Surgery
KW - Coronary Disease/Myocardial Infarction
KW - Emergency Medicine
KW - Frailty
KW - Geriatrics/Aging
KW - Geriatrics/Aging General
KW - Surgery
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85208771782&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1056/NEJMoa2407791
DO - 10.1056/NEJMoa2407791
M3 - Article
C2 - 39225274
AN - SCOPUS:85208771782
SN - 0028-4793
VL - 391
SP - 1673
EP - 1684
JO - New England Journal of Medicine
JF - New England Journal of Medicine
IS - 18
ER -