A systematic review and meta-analysis on the effectiveness of an invasive strategy compared to a conservative approach in patients > 65 years old with non-ST elevation acute coronary syndrome

Autor: Bernadette A. Tumanan-Mendoza, Louie Alfred B. Shiu, Karen V. Miralles, Noemi S. Pestaño, Rafael R Castillo, Maria Grethel C. Dimalala, Michael Joseph T. Reyes, Felix Eduardo R. Punzalan, Joan Dymphna P. Reaño
Rok vydání: 2020
Předmět:
Male
Cardiac Catheterization
Cardiovascular Procedures
medicine.medical_treatment
Myocardial Infarction
030204 cardiovascular system & hematology
Conservative Treatment
Pathology and Laboratory Medicine
Vascular Medicine
law.invention
0302 clinical medicine
Randomized controlled trial
law
Myocardial Revascularization
Medicine and Health Sciences
Coronary Heart Disease
030212 general & internal medicine
Myocardial infarction
Coronary Artery Bypass
Non-ST Elevated Myocardial Infarction
Stroke
Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
Aged
80 and over

education.field_of_study
Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting
Multidisciplinary
Angina
Meta-analysis
Medicine
Female
Research Article
medicine.medical_specialty
Acute coronary syndrome
Drug Research and Development
Science
Population
Cardiology
Surgical and Invasive Medical Procedures
Hemorrhage
Research and Analysis Methods
03 medical and health sciences
Percutaneous Coronary Intervention
Signs and Symptoms
Diagnostic Medicine
Internal medicine
medicine
Humans
Clinical Trials
Acute Coronary Syndrome
education
Aged
Coronary Revascularization
Pharmacology
business.industry
Revascularization
Percutaneous coronary intervention
medicine.disease
Randomized Controlled Trials
Relative risk
Clinical Medicine
business
Zdroj: PLoS ONE
PLoS ONE, Vol 15, Iss 2, p e0229491 (2020)
ISSN: 1932-6203
Popis: Background Patients 65 years old and older largely represent (>50%) hospital-admitted patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS). Data are conflicting comparing efficacy of early routine invasive (within 48–72 hours of initial evaluation) versus conservative management of ACS in this population. Objective We aimed to determine the effectiveness of routine early invasive strategy compared to conservative treatment in reducing major adverse cardiovascular events in patients 65 years old and older with non-ST elevation (NSTE) ACS. Data sources We conducted a systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) through PubMed, Cochrane, and Google Scholar database. Study selection The studies included were RCTs that evaluated the effectiveness of invasive strategy compared to conservative treatment among patients ≥ 65 years old diagnosed with NSTEACS. Studies were included if they assessed any of the following outcomes of death, cardiovascular mortality, myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, recurrent angina, and need for revascularization. Six articles were subsequently included in the meta-analysis. Data extraction Three independent reviewers extracted the data of interest from the articles using a standardized data collection form that included study quality indicators. Disparity in assessment was adjudicated by another reviewer. Data synthesis All pooled analyses were initially done using Fixed Effects model. For pooled analyses with significant heterogeneity (I2≥ 50%), the Random Effects model was used. A total of 3,768 patients were included, 1,986 in the invasive strategy group, and 1,782 in the conservative treatment group. Results Meta-analysis showed less incidence of revascularization in the invasive (2%) over conservative treatment groups (8%), with overall risk ratio of 0.29 (95% CI 0.14 to 0.59). Across all pooled studies, no significant effect of invasive strategy on all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, stroke, and MI was observed. Only one study assessed the outcome of recurrent angina. Conclusion There was a significantly lower rate of revascularization in the invasive strategy group compared to the conservative treatment group. In the reduction of all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, MI, and stroke there was no significant effect of invasive strategy versus conservative treatment. This finding does not support the bias against early routine invasive intervention in patients ≥ 65 years old with NSTEACS. Further studies focusing on these patients with larger population sizes are still needed.
Databáze: OpenAIRE