Randomized comparison between the invasive and conservative strategies in comorbid elderly patients with non-ST elevation myocardial infarction

Juan Sanchis, Eduardo Núñez, José Antonio Barrabés, Francisco Marín, Luciano Consuegra-Sánchez, Silvia Ventura, Ernesto Valero, Mercè Roqué, Antoni Bayés-Genís, Bruno García del Blanco, Irene Dégano, Julio Núñez

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

48 Citations (Scopus)


© 2016 European Federation of Internal Medicine. Background Comorbid elderly patients with non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction (non-STEMI) are underrepresented in randomized trials and undergo fewer cardiac catheterizations according to registries. Our aim was to compare the conservative and invasive strategies in these patients. Methods Randomized multicenter study, including 106 patients (January 2012–March 2014) with non-STEMI, over 70 years and with comorbidities defined by at least two of the following: peripheral artery disease, cerebral vascular disease, dementia, chronic pulmonary disease, chronic renal failure or anemia. Patients were randomized to invasive (routine coronary angiogram, n = 52) or conservative (coronary angiogram only if recurrent ischemia or heart failure, n = 54) strategy. Medical treatment was identical. The main endpoint was the composite of all-cause mortality, reinfarction and readmission for cardiac cause (postdischarge revascularization or heart failure), at long-term (2.5-year follow-up). Analysis of cumulative event rate (incidence rate ratio = IRR) and time to first event (hazard ratio = HR), were performed. Results Cardiac catheterization/revascularization rates were 100%/58% in the invasive versus 20%/9% in the conservative arm. There were no differences between groups in the main endpoint (invasive vs conservative: IRR = 0.946, 95% CI 0.466–1.918, p = 0.877) at long-term. The invasive strategy, however, tended to improve 3-month outcomes in terms of mortality (HR = 0.348, 95% CI 0.122–0.991, p = 0.048), and of mortality or ischemic events (reinfarction or postdischarge revascularization) (HR = 0.432, 95% CI 0.190–0.984, p = 0.046). This benefit declined during follow-up. Conclusions Invasive management did not modify long-term outcome in comorbid elderly patients with non-STEMI. The finding of a tendency towards an improvement in the short-term needs confirmation in larger studies (clinicaltrials.govNCT1645943).
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)89-94
JournalEuropean Journal of Internal Medicine
Publication statusPublished - 1 Nov 2016


  • Comorbidities
  • Elderly
  • Invasive management
  • Non-ST elevation myocardial infarction


Dive into the research topics of 'Randomized comparison between the invasive and conservative strategies in comorbid elderly patients with non-ST elevation myocardial infarction'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this