Evaluation of a Strategy Guided by Imaging Versus Systematic Coronary Angiography in Elderly Patients With Ischemia

Overview

The WHO predicts that cardiovascular morbi-mortality will increase by 120-137% within 20 years due to the aging population. Myocardial infarction without ST segment elevation (NSTEMI) is the most common form of infarction. However, its treatment among elderly patients remains a challenging question. Indeed, the risk benefit balance of revascularization remains unclear, and complications related to revascularization are more frequent in the elderly, including MI, heart failure, stroke, renal failure and bleeding according to National Cardiovascular Network data.The last randomized controlled trial "After Eighty Study", showed a reduction of major cardio-cerebrovascular events (MACCEs) in NSTEMI patients with an invasive strategy (systematic coronary angiography - CA) compared to a conservative strategy (medical treatment alone). Nevertheless, this study presented several limitations of which a major one was the lack of a definition of frailty at inclusion. Moreover, the "After Eighty Study" has shown that percutaneous revascularization in the invasive arm was only performed for 1 in 2 patients showing an inadequacy in the strategy for selecting candidates for revascularization. Consequently, despite European Society of Cardiology (ESC) guidelines, the management of NSTEMI in elderly patients is not yet evidence based, and current recommendations do not provide any clear clinical decision rule indicating one strategy over another. For fragile patients, an alternative strategy consists of selecting candidates for a guided CA according to the extent of myocardial ischemia, identified by non-invasive imaging. Single-photon emission computed tomography or dobutamine stress echocardiograms are currently the reference methods with well-defined interpretation of ischemia. According to our experience, this strategy avoids CA for one third of patients and improves the rate of revascularization. The aim of our study is to compare 1-year morbidity and mortality in NSTEMI patients over 80 years, assigned to guided versus systematic-CA. Our hypothesis is that the guided strategy will not be inferior on MACE rates at 1 year, and will be cost-effective by reducing iatrogenic complications.