Five-year clinical outcomes in patients with frailty aged ≥75 years with non-ST elevation acute coronary syndrome undergoing invasive management

Invasive Treatment Strategy for Older Patients with Myocardial Infarction

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. (Funded by the British Heart Foundation; BHF SENIOR-RITA ISRCTN Registry number, ISRCTN11343602.).

Current Management of Non-ST-Segment Elevation Acute Coronary Syndrome

Cardiovascular disease constitutes the leading cause of morbimortality worldwide. Non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS) is a common cardiovascular condition, closely related to the ageing population and significantly affecting survival and quality of life. The management of NSTE-ACS requires specific diagnosis and therapeutic strategies, thus highlighting the importance of a personalized approach, including tailored antithrombotic therapies and regimens, combined with timely invasive management. Moreover, specific and frequent populations in clinical practice, such as the elderly and those with chronic kidney disease, pose unique challenges in the management of NSTE-ACS due to their increased risk of ischemic and hemorrhagic complications. In this scenario, comprehensive management strategies and multidisciplinary care are of great importance. Cardiac rehabilitation and optimal management of cardiovascular risk factors are essential elements of secondary prevention since they significantly improve prognosis. This review highlights the need for a personalized approach in the management of NSTE-ACS, especially in vulnerable populations, and emphasizes the importance of precise antithrombotic management together with tailored revascularization strategies, as well as the role of cardiac rehabilitation in NSTE-ACS patients.

Invasive vs. conservative management of older patients with non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome: individual patient data meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Older patients with non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTEACS) are less likely to receive guideline-recommended care including coronary angiography and revascularization. Evidence-based recommendations regarding interventional management strategies in this patient cohort are scarce. This meta-analysis aimed to assess the impact of routine invasive vs. conservative management of NSTEACS by using individual patient data (IPD) from all available randomized controlled trials (RCTs) including older patients.

METHODS

MEDLINE, Web of Science and Scopus were searched between 1 January 2010 and 11 September 2023. RCTs investigating routine invasive and conservative strategies in persons >70 years old with NSTEACS were included. Observational studies or trials involving populations outside the target range were excluded. The primary endpoint was a composite of all-cause mortality and myocardial infarction (MI) at 1 year. One-stage IPD meta-analyses were adopted by use of random-effects and fixed-effect Cox models. This meta-analysis is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42023379819).

RESULTS

Six eligible studies were identified including 1479 participants. The primary endpoint occurred in 181 of 736 (24.5%) participants in the invasive management group compared with 215 of 743 (28.9%) participants in the conservative management group with a hazard ratio (HR) from random-effects model of 0.87 (95% CI 0.63-1.22; P = .43). The hazard for MI at 1 year was significantly lower in the invasive group compared with the conservative group (HR from random-effects model 0.62, 95% CI 0.44-0.87; P = .006). Similar results were seen for urgent revascularization (HR from random-effects model 0.41, 95% CI 0.18-0.95; P = .037). There was no significant difference in mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

No evidence was found that routine invasive treatment for NSTEACS in older patients reduces the risk of a composite of all-cause mortality and MI within 1 year compared with conservative management. However, there is convincing evidence that invasive treatment significantly lowers the risk of repeat MI or urgent revascularisation. Further evidence is needed from ongoing larger clinical trials.

Prevalence of frailty and association with patient centered outcomes: A prospective registry-embedded cohort study from India

PURPOSE

We aimed to study the prevalence of frailty, evaluate risk factors, and understand impact on outcomes in India.

METHODS

This was a prospective registry-embedded cohort study across 7 intensive care units (ICUs) and included adult patients anticipated to stay for at least 48 h. Primary exposure was frailty, as defined by a score ≥ 5 on the Clinical Frailty Scale and primary outcome was ICU mortality. Secondary outcomes included in-hospital mortality and resource utilization. We used generalized linear models to evaluate risk factors and model association between frailty and outcomes.

RESULTS

838 patients were included, with median (IQR) age 57 (42,68) yrs.; 64.8% were male. Prevalence of frailty was 19.8%. Charlson comorbidity index (OR:1.73 (95%CI:1.39,2.15)), Subjective Global Assessment categories mild/moderate malnourishment (OR:1.90 (95%CI:1.29, 2.80)) and severe malnourishment (OR:4.76 (95% CI:2.10,10.77)) were associated with frailty. Frailty was associated with higher odds of ICU mortality (adjusted OR:2.04 (95% CI:1.25,3.33)), hospital mortality (adjusted OR:2.36 (95%CI:1.45,3.84)), development of stage2/3 AKI (unadjusted OR:2.35 (95%CI:1.60, 3.43)), receipt of non-invasive ventilation (unadjusted OR:2.68 (95%CI:1.77, 4.03)), receipt of vasopressors (unadjusted OR:1.47 (95%CI:1.04, 2.07)), and receipt of kidney replacement therapy (unadjusted OR:3.15 (95%CI:1.90, 5.17)).

CONCLUSIONS

Frailty is common among critically ill patients in India and is associated with worse outcomes.

STUDY REGISTRATION

CTRI/2021/02/031503.

Cognitive impairment and outcomes in older adults with non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to explore the prognostic impact of cognitive impairment on the long-term risk of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) in older patients with non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTEACS) undergoing invasive treatment.

METHODS

Patients aged ≥75 years with NSTEACS undergoing an invasive strategy were included in the multicentre prospective study (NCT01933581). Montreal Cognitive Assessment was used to evaluate cognitive status at baseline (scores ≥26 classified as normal, <26 as cognitive impairment). Long-term follow-up data were obtained from electronic patient care records. The primary endpoint was MACE as a composite of all-cause deaths, reinfarction, stroke/transient ischaemic attack, urgent revascularisation and significant bleeding.

RESULTS

239 patients with baseline cognitive assessment completed long-term follow-up. Median age was 80.9 years (IQR 78.2-83.9 years) and 62.3% were male. On 5-year follow-up, there was no significant difference in the occurrence of MACE between the cognitively impaired group and the normal cognition group (p=0.155). Cognition status was not associated with MACE (HR 1.37 (95% CI 0.96 to 1.95); p=0.082). However, there was significantly more deaths (p=0.005) in those with cognitive impairment. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis (log-rank p=0.003) and Cox regression analysis (aHR 1.85 (95% CI 1.11 to 3.08); p=0.018) revealed increased risk of all-cause mortality, even after adjusting for frailty and GRACE (Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events) score.

CONCLUSION

Cognitive impairment in older patients with NSTEACS undergoing an invasive strategy was associated with long-term all-cause mortality. Routine cognitive screening may aid risk stratification and further studies are needed to identify how this should influence management strategies and individual decision-making in this patient group.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT01933581.

Differences in treatment and clinical outcomes in patients aged ≥75 years compared with those aged ≤74 years following acute coronary syndromes: a prospective multicentre study

OBJECTIVE

This study describes the differences in treatment and clinical outcomes in patients aged ≥75 years compared with those aged ≤74 years presenting with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and undergoing invasive management.

METHODS

A large-scale cohort study of patients with ST-elevation/non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction (MI)/unstable angina underwent coronary angiography (January 2015-December 2019). Patients were classified as older (≥75 years) and younger (≤74 years). Regression analysis was used to yield adjusted risks of mortality for older versus younger patients (adjusted for history of heart failure, hypercholesterolaemia, peripheral vascular disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, ischaemic heart disease, presence of ST-elevation MI on presenting ECG, female sex and cardiogenic shock at presentation).

RESULTS

In total, 11 763 patients were diagnosed with ACS, of which 39% were aged ≥75 years. Percutaneous coronary intervention was performed in fewer older patients than younger patients (81.2% vs 86.2%, p<0.001). At discharge, older patients were prescribed less secondary-prevention medications than younger patients. Median follow-up was 4.57 years. Older patients had a greater risk of in-hospital mortality than younger patients (adjusted OR (aOR) 2.12, 95% CI 1.62 to 2.78, p<0.001). Older patients diagnosed with ST-elevation MI had greater adjusted odds of dying in-hospital (aOR 2.47, 95% CI 1.79 to 3.41, p<0.001). Older age was not an independent prognostic factor of mortality at 1 year (adjusted HR (aHR) 0.95, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.09, p=0.460) and at longer term (aHR 0.98, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.10, p=0.684).

CONCLUSIONS

Older patients are discharged with less secondary prevention. Patients aged ≥75 years are more likely to die in-hospital than younger patients.

Effect of Frailty on the Long-Term Prognosis of Elderly Patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction

Background

To investigate the effect of frailty on the long-term prognosis of elderly patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI).

Methods

The data of 238 AMI patients (aged ≥75 years) were retrospectively reviewed. They were divided into two groups according to the Modified Frailty Index (mFI): frailty group (mFI≥0.27, n=143) and non-frailty group (mFI<0.27, n=95). The major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACEs) and Kaplan-Meier survival curves of the two groups were compared. Multivariate Cox regression analysis was used to identify the risk factors for MACEs.

Results

The frailty group showed a significantly older age as well as a higher N-terminal proB-type natriuretic peptide level, Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events score, and CRUSADE bleeding score compared with the non-frailty group (P<0.05). A significantly greater proportion of patients with combined heart failure, atrial fibrillation, comorbidity, and activities of daily living score of <60 was also observed in the frailty group compared with the non-frailty group (P<0.05). At 36 months after AMI, the frailty group vs the non-frailty group showed a significantly poorer survival (log-rank P=0.005), higher incidence of MACEs (50.35 vs 29.47, P=0.001), higher overall mortality rate (20.98% vs 7.37%, P=0.006), higher 30-day mortality rate (13.99% vs 5.26%, P=0.033), higher major bleeding rate (14.69% vs 5.26, P=0.018), and lower repeat revascularization rate (2.10% vs 8.42%, P=0.03). Frailty, type 2 diabetes, and N-terminal proB-type natriuretic peptide ≥1800 pg/mL were independent risk factors for MACEs.

Conclusion

Frailty is an independent risk factor affecting the long-term prognosis of elderly patients with AMI.

Tailoring antiplatelet therapy in older patients with coronary artery disease

The older population represents a unique subset of patients due to a higher rate of comorbidities and risk factors, which can lead to a higher rate of ischemic and bleeding events. As a result, older adults are mainly underrepresented or excluded from randomized trials. Although the advancement in the percutaneous coronary intervention field with the development of new technologies, techniques, and potent antiplatelet therapy led to a reduction of ischemic risk, there is still a concern regarding bleeding hazards. Apart from the global utilization of less invasive trans-radial approach and proton pump inhibitors to reduce bleeding risk, proper tailoring of antiplatelet therapy in the older person is imperative. So far, several antiplatelet drugs have been introduced in different clinical scenarios, with dual antiplatelet therapy (combination of acetylsalicylic acid and P2Y12 inhibitor) recommended after percutaneous coronary intervention. The decision on the choice of antiplatelet drug and the DAPT duration is challenging and should be based on the relationship between ischemia and bleeding with the purpose of reducing ischemic events but not at the expense of increased bleeding complications. This is particularly important in the older population, where the evidence is obscure. The main objective of this review is to summarize the available evidence on contemporary antiplatelet therapy and different approaches of de-escalation strategies in older patients after percutaneous coronary intervention.

Beyond MACE: a multidimensional approach to outcomes in clinical trials for older adults with stable ischemic heart disease

The global population of older adults is expanding rapidly resulting in a shift towards managing multiple chronic diseases that coexist and may be exacerbated by cardiovascular illness. Stable ischemic heart disease (SIHD) is a predominant contributor to morbidity and mortality in the older adult population. Although results from clinical trials demonstrate that chronological age is a predictor of poor health outcomes, the current management approach remains suboptimal due to insufficient representation of older adults in randomized trials and the inadequate consideration for the interaction between biological aging, concurrent geriatric syndromes, and patient preferences. A shift towards a more patient-centered approach is necessary for appropriately and effectively managing SIHD in the older adult population. In this review, we aim to demonstrate the distinctive needs of older adults who prioritize holistic health outcomes like functional capacity, cognitive abilities, mental health, and quality of life alongside the prevention of major adverse cardiovascular outcomes reported in cardiovascular clinical trials. An individualized, patient-centered approach that involves shared decision-making regarding outcome prioritization is needed when any treatment strategy is being considered. By prioritizing patients and addressing their unique needs for successful aging, we can provide more effective care to a patient population that exhibits the highest cardiovascular risks.

Guideline concordant prescribing following myocardial infarction in people who are frail: A systematic review

AIMS

The risk-to-benefit ratio of cardioprotective medications in frail older adults is uncertain. The objective was to systematically review prescribing of guideline-recommended cardioprotective medications following myocardial infarction (MI) in people who are frail.

DATA SOURCES

Ovid Medline, PubMed and Cochrane were searched from inception to October 2022 for studies that reported prescribing of one or more cardioprotective medication classes post-MI or acute coronary syndromes in people with frailty.

STUDY SELECTION

We included observational studies that reported prescribing of cardioprotective medications post-MI stratified by frailty status.

RESULTS

Overall, 16 cohort studies published from 2013 to 2022 that used seven different frailty scales were included. Prescribing of all cardioprotective medication classes following MI was lower in frail compared to non-frail people, with absolute rates of prescribing varying substantially across studies. Median prescribing in frail and non-frail people, respectively, was 88.9% (IQR 81.5-96.2) and 93.1% (IQR 92.0-98.9) for aspirin; 68.1% (IQR 61.9-91.2) and 86.7% (IQR 79.5-92.8) for P2Y12-inhibitors; 83.1% (IQR 76.9-91.3) and 94.0% (IQR 87.1-95.9) for lipid-lowering therapy; 67.9% (IQR 60.6-74.0) and 74.7% (IQR 71.3-84.5) for angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin II receptor blockers; and 74.1% (IQR 69.2-79) and 77.6% (IQR 71.8-85.9) for beta-blockers.

CONCLUSION

People who were frail were less likely to be prescribed guideline recommended medication classes post-MI than those who were non-frail. Further research is needed into treatment benefits and risks in frail people to avoid unnecessarily withholding treatment in this high-risk population, while also minimising potential for medication related harm.

Role and relevance of risk stratification models in the modern-day management of non-ST elevation acute coronary syndromes

We summarise the international guidelines surrounding risk stratification as well as discuss new emerging data for future development of a new risk model in the management of patients with non-ST segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS). NSTE-ACS accounts for the bulk of acute coronary syndrome presentations in the UK, but management strategies in this group of patients have remained a subject of debate for decades. Patients with NSTE-ACS represent a heterogeneous population with a wide variation in short-term and long-term clinical outcomes, which makes a uniform, standardised treatment approach ineffective and inappropriate. Studies in the modern era have provided some guidance in treating this subset of patients: the provision of early, more potent therapies has been shown to improve outcomes in patients at a particularly elevated risk of adverse outcomes. International guidelines recommend adopting an individualised treatment approach through the use of validated risk prediction models to identify such patients at high risk of adverse outcomes. The present available evidence, however, is based on dated demographics, different diagnostic thresholds and outdated therapies. In particular, the evidence has limited applicability to female patients and older people with frailty. Moreover, the current risk models do not capture key prognostic variables, leading to an inaccurate estimation of patients' baseline risk and subsequent mistreatment. Therefore, the current risk models are no longer fit for purpose and there is a need for risk prediction scores that account for different population demographics, higher sensitivity troponin assays and contemporary treatment options.

Angiographic and Procedural Characteristics in Frail Older Patients with Non-ST Elevation Acute Coronary Syndrome

Background

Angiographic and procedural characteristics stratified by frailty status are not known in older patients with non-ST elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTEACS). We evaluated angiographic and procedural characteristics in older adults with NSTEACS by frailty category, as well as associations of baseline and residual SYNTAX scores with long-term outcomes.

Methods

In this study, 271 NSTEACS patients aged ≥75 years underwent coronary angiography. Frailty was assessed using the Fried criteria. Angiographic analysis was performed using QAngio® XA Medis in a core laboratory. Major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) consisted of all-cause mortality, MI, stroke or transient ischaemic attack, repeat unplanned revascularisation and significant bleeding.

Results

Mean (±SD) patient age was 80.5 ± 4.9 years. Compared with robust patients, patients with frailty had more severe culprit lesion calcification (OR 5.40; 95% CI [1.75-16.8]; p=0.03). In addition, patients with frailty had a smaller mean improvement in culprit lesion stenosis after percutaneous coronary intervention (50.6%; 95% CI [45.7-55.6]) than robust patients (58.6%; 95% CI [53.5-63.7]; p=0.042). There was no association between frailty phenotype and completeness of revascularisation (OR 0.83; 95% CI [0.36-1.93]; p=0.67). A high baseline SYNTAX score (≥33) was associated with adjusted (age and sex) 5-year MACE (HR 1.40; 95% CI [1.08-1.81]; p=0.01), as was a high residual SYNTAX score (≥8; adjusted HR 1.22; 95% CI [1.00-1.49]; p=0.047).

Conclusion

Frail adults presenting with NSTEACS have more severe culprit lesion calcification. Frail adults were just as likely as robust patients to receive complete revascularisation. Baseline and residual SYNTAX score were associated with MACE at 5 years.

Management of Acute Coronary Syndrome in the Older Adult Population: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association

Diagnostic and therapeutic advances during the past decades have substantially improved health outcomes for patients with acute coronary syndrome. Both age-related physiological changes and accumulated cardiovascular risk factors increase the susceptibility to acute coronary syndrome over a lifetime. Compared with younger patients, outcomes for acute coronary syndrome in the large and growing demographic of older adults are relatively worse. Increased atherosclerotic plaque burden and complexity of anatomic disease, compounded by age-related cardiovascular and noncardiovascular comorbid conditions, contribute to the worse prognosis observed in older individuals. Geriatric syndromes, including frailty, multimorbidity, impaired cognitive and physical function, polypharmacy, and other complexities of care, can undermine the therapeutic efficacy of guidelines-based treatments and the resiliency of older adults to survive and recover, as well. In this American Heart Association scientific statement, we (1) review age-related physiological changes that predispose to acute coronary syndrome and management complexity; (2) describe the influence of commonly encountered geriatric syndromes on cardiovascular disease outcomes; and (3) recommend age-appropriate and guideline-concordant revascularization and acute coronary syndrome management strategies, including transitions of care, the use of cardiac rehabilitation, palliative care services, and holistic approaches. The primacy of individualized risk assessment and patient-centered care decision-making is highlighted throughout.