Primary Angioplasty in Patients Older Than 75 Years. Profile of Patients and Procedures, Outcomes, and Predictors of Prognosis in the ESTROFA IM+75 Registry

Trends in primary percutaneous coronary intervention for the treatment of acute coronary ST-elevation myocardial infarction in Latin American countries: insights from the CECI consortium

Background

ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) requires revascularization treatment, preferably via primary percutaneous coronary interventions (pPCI). There is a lack of data about contemporary management of STEMI in Latin America.

Methods

This was a multicenter, multinational, prospective, and dynamic registry of patients undergoing pPCI in Latin America for STEMI (STEMI/LATAMI Registry) that was carried out in nine centers from five countries (Argentina, Ecuador, Venezuela, Bolivia, and the Dominican Republic) between June 2021 and June 2023. All interventionalists involved in the study were originally trained at the same institution (Centro de Estudios en Cardiología Intervencionista, Buenos Aires, Argentina). The primary objective was to evaluate procedural and in-hospital outcomes of pPCI in STEMI and in-hospital outcome in the Latin America (LATAM) region; as secondary endpoints, we analyzed the following subgroups: differences between pPCI vs. pharmaco-invasive or late presenters, gender, elderly and very elderly patients, cardiogenic shock outcomes, and causes of STEMI.

Results

In total, 744 STEMI patients who underwent PCI between June 2021 and June 2023 in five countries (nine centers) in our continent were included; 76.3% had a pPCI, 8.1% pharmaco-invasive PCI, and 15.6% had late STEMI PCI. There were no differences in region or center when we evaluated in-hospital and 30 days of death. The rate of procedural success was 96.2%, and the overall in-hospital mortality rate was 2.2%. In the subgroup of pPCI, mean symptom onset-to-balloon time was 295.3 ± 246 min, and mean door-to-balloon time was 55.8 ± 49.9 min. The femoral approach was chosen in 60.5%. In 3.0% of patients, the left main disease was the culprit artery, with 1.63 ± 1.00 stents per patient (564 drug-eluting stents and 652 bare metal stents), with 34 patients receiving only plain optimal balloon angioplasty. Definitive stent thrombosis was related to the infarct artery as the primary cause of STEMI in 7.5% of patients. The use of assistant mechanical devices was low, at 2.1% in the pPCI group. Women were older, with large numbers in very elderly age (≥90 years), greater mortality, and incidence of spontaneous coronary dissection as a cause of STEMI (p < 0.001, p < 0.001, p < 0.001, and p < 0.003, respectively).

Conclusion

In suitable LATAM Centers from low/medium-income countries, this prospective registry in patients with STEMI, PCI performed by well-trained operators has comparable results to those reported in well-developed countries.

Comparison of long-term outcomes of complete vs. incomplete revascularization in elderly patients (≥75 years) with acute coronary syndrome and multi-vessel disease undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention

BACKGROUND

The optimal revascularization strategy for elderly patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) remains uncertain. We evaluated the impact of complete revascularization (CR) vs. incomplete revascularization (IR) in elderly ACS patients with multivessel disease (MVD) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).

METHODS

Using registry data from 2011 to 2019, we conducted a propensity-score matched cohort study. Elderly patients (≥75 years) with ACS and MVD who underwent PCI were divided into CR and IR groups based on angiography during index hospitalization. Major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs), including all-cause mortality, recurrent non-fatal myocardial infarction, and any revascularization, were assessed at 3-year follow-up.

RESULTS

Among 1,018 enrolled patients, 496 (48.7%) underwent CR and 522 (51.3%) received IR. After 1:1 propensity-score matching, we analyzed 395 pairs. At 3-year follow-up, CR was significantly associated with lower MACE risk compared to IR (16.7% vs. 25.6%, HR = 0.65, 95% CI: 0.47-0.88, p = 0.006), driven by reduced all-cause mortality. This benefit was consistent across all pre-specified subgroups, particularly in ST segment elevation (STE)-ACS patients. In non-STE (NSTE)-ACS subgroup analysis, CR was also associated with a lower risk of cardiac mortality compared to IR (HR = 0.30, 95% CI: 0.12-0.75, p = 0.01).

CONCLUSION

In elderly ACS patients with MVD undergoing PCI, CR demonstrates superior long-term outcomes compared to IR, irrespective of STE- or NSTE-ACS presentation.

Acute Coronary Syndrome in the Older Patient

Coronary artery disease is one of the leading causes of morbidity and mortality, and its prevalence increases with age. The growing number of older patients and their differential characteristics make its management a challenge in clinical practice. The aim of this review is to summarize the state-of-the-art in diagnosis and treatment of acute coronary syndromes in this subgroup of patients. This comprises peculiarities of ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) management, updated evidence of non-STEMI therapeutic strategies, individualization of antiplatelet treatment (weighting ischemic and hemorrhagic risks), as well as assessment of geriatric conditions and ethical issues in decision making.

Benefit of primary percutaneous coronary interventions in the elderly with ST segment elevation myocardial infarction

Objective

Primary percutaneous coronary intervention (P-PCI) has demonstrated its efficacy in patients with ST segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). However, patients with STEMI ≥75 years receive less P-PCI than younger patients despite their higher in-hospital morbimortality. The objective of this analysis was to determine the effectiveness of P-PCI in patients with STEMI ≥75 years.

Methods

We included 979 patients with STEMI ≥75 years, from the ATención HOspitalaria del Síndrome coronario study, a registry of 8142 consecutive patients with acute coronary syndrome admitted at 31 Spanish hospitals in 2014–2016. We calculated a propensity score (PS) for the indication of P-PCI. Patients that received or not P-PCI were matched by PS. Using logistic regression, we compared the effectiveness of performing P-PCI versus non-performance for the composite primary event, which included death, reinfarction, acute pulmonary oedema or cardiogenic shock during hospitalisation.

Results

Of the included patients, 81.5 % received P-PCI. The matching provided two groups of 169 patients with and without P-PCI. Compared with its non-performance, P-PCI presented a composite event OR adjusted by PS of 0.55 (95% CI 0.34 to 0.89).

Conclusions

Receiving a P-PCI was significantly associated with a reduced risk of major intrahospital complications in patients with STEMI aged 75 years or older.

From Nonclinical Research to Clinical Trials and Patient-registries: Challenges and Opportunities in Biomedical Research

The most important challenge faced by human beings is health. The only way to provide better solutions for health care is innovation, true innovation. The only source of true innovation is research, good research indeed. The pathway from a basic science study to a randomized clinical trial is long and not free of bumps and even landmines. These are all the obstacles and barriers that limit the availability of resources, entangle administrative-regulatory processes, and restrain investigators' initiatives. There is increasing demand for evidence to guide clinical practice but, paradoxically, biomedical research has become increasingly complex, expensive, and difficult to integrate into clinical care with increased barriers to performing the practical aspects of investigation. We face the challenge of increasing the volume of biomedical research and simultaneously improving the efficiency and output of this research. In this article, we review the main stages and methods of biomedical research, from nonclinical studies with animal and computational models to randomized trials and clinical registries, focusing on their limitations and challenges, but also providing alternative solutions to overcome them. Fortunately, challenges are always opportunities in disguise.