Early Invasive Strategy for Unstable Angina: a New Meta-Analysis of Old Clinical Trials

Antithrombotic treatment tailoring and risk score evaluation in elderly patients diagnosed with an acute coronary syndrome

Age is an important prognostic factor in the outcome of acute coronary syndromes (ACS). A substantial percentage of patients who experience ACS is more than 75 years old, and they represent the fastest-growing segment of the population treated in this setting. These patients present different patterns of responses to pharmacotherapy, namely, a higher ischemic and bleeding risk than do patients under 75 years of age. Our aim was to identify whether the currently available ACS ischemic and bleeding risk scores, which has been validated for the general population, may also apply to the elderly population. The second aim was to determine whether the elderly benefit more from a specific pharmacological regimen, keeping in mind the numerous molecules of antiplatelet and antithrombotic drugs, all validated in the general population. We concluded that the GRACE (Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events) risk score has been extensively validated in the elderly. However, the CRUSADE (Can Rapid risk stratification of Unstable angina patients Suppress ADverse outcomes with Early implementation of the ACC/AHA Guidelines) bleeding score has a moderate correlation with outcomes in the elderly. Until now, there have not been head-to-head scores that quantify the ischemic versus hemorrhagic risk or scores that use the same end point and timeline (e.g., ischemic death rate versus bleeding death rate at one month). We also recommend that the frailty score be considered or integrated into the current existing scores to better quantify the overall patient risk. With regard to medical treatment, based on the subgroup analysis, we identified the drugs that have the least adverse effects in the elderly while maintaining optimal efficacy.

Early invasive versus non-invasive treatment in patients with non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome (FRISC-II): 15 year follow-up of a prospective, randomised, multicentre study

BACKGROUND

The FRISC-II trial was the first randomised trial to show a reduction in death or myocardial infarction with an early invasive versus a non-invasive treatment strategy in patients with non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome. Here we provide a remaining lifetime perspective on the effects on all cardiovascular events during 15 years' follow-up.

METHODS

The FRISC-II prospective, randomised, multicentre trial was done at 58 Scandinavian centres in Sweden, Denmark, and Norway. Between June 17, 1996, and Aug 28, 1998, we randomly assigned (1:1) 2457 patients with non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome to an early invasive treatment strategy, aiming for revascularisation within 7 days, or a non-invasive strategy, with invasive procedures at recurrent symptoms or severe exercise-induced ischaemia. Plasma for biomarker analyses was obtained at randomisation. For long-term outcomes, we linked data with national health-care registers. The primary endpoint was a composite of death or myocardial infarction. Outcomes were compared as the average postponement of the next event, including recurrent events, calculated as the area between mean cumulative count-of-events curves. Analyses were done by intention to treat.

FINDINGS

At a minimum of 15 years' follow-up on Dec 31, 2014, data for survival status and death were available for 2421 (99%) of the initially recruited 2457 patients, and for other events after 2 years for 2182 (89%) patients. During follow-up, the invasive strategy postponed death or next myocardial infarction by a mean of 549 days (95% CI 204-888; p=0·0020) compared with the non-invasive strategy. This effect was larger in non-smokers (mean gain 809 days, 95% CI 402-1175; p_interaction=0·0182), patients with elevated troponin T (778 days, 357-1165; p_interaction=0·0241), and patients with high concentrations of growth differentiation factor-15 (1356 days, 507-1650; p_interaction=0·0210). The difference was mainly driven by postponement of new myocardial infarction, whereas the early difference in mortality alone was not sustained over time. The invasive strategy led to a mean of 1128 days (95% CI 830-1366) postponement of death or next readmission to hospital for ischaemic heart disease, which was consistent in all subgroups (p<0·0001).

INTERPRETATION

During 15 years of follow-up, an early invasive treatment strategy postponed the occurrence of death or next myocardial infarction by an average of 18 months, and the next readmission to hospital for ischaemic heart disease by 37 months, compared with a non-invasive strategy in patients with non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome. This remaining lifetime perspective supports that an early invasive treatment strategy should be the preferred option in most patients with non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome.

FUNDING

Swedish Heart-Lung Foundation, Swedish Foundation for Strategic Research, and Uppsala Clinical Research Center.

Expert Opinion Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Older People: Does Age Make a Difference?

As many people are living longer, much older patients are now commonly being seen in clinical practice. The management of coronary disease in this group presents formidable challenges. We review the epidemiology of coronary disease in this population and report on the burden of comorbidity, influence of frailty, problems with polypharmacy, interactions and compliance for the older patient. We discuss the management of stable and acute coronary syndromes, the specific anatomical challenges of the older coronary artery, the outcomes of the limited number of trials involving older patients, and review the guidelines available.