RESUMEN
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.).
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The optimal imaging strategy for patients with stable chest pain is uncertain. OBJECTIVE: To determine the cost-effectiveness of different imaging strategies for patients with stable chest pain. DESIGN: Microsimulation state-transition model. DATA SOURCES: Published literature. TARGET POPULATION: 60-year-old patients with a low to intermediate probability of coronary artery disease (CAD). TIME HORIZON: Lifetime. PERSPECTIVE: The United States, the United Kingdom, and the Netherlands. INTERVENTION: Coronary computed tomography (CT) angiography, cardiac stress magnetic resonance imaging, stress single-photon emission CT, and stress echocardiography. OUTCOME MEASURES: Lifetime costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios. RESULTS OF BASE-CASE ANALYSIS: The strategy that maximized QALYs and was cost-effective in the United States and the Netherlands began with coronary CT angiography, continued with cardiac stress imaging if angiography found at least 50% stenosis in at least 1 coronary artery, and ended with catheter-based coronary angiography if stress imaging induced ischemia of any severity. For U.K. men, the preferred strategy was optimal medical therapy without catheter-based coronary angiography if coronary CT angiography found only moderate CAD or stress imaging induced only mild ischemia. In these strategies, stress echocardiography was consistently more effective and less expensive than other stress imaging tests. For U.K. women, the optimal strategy was stress echocardiography followed by catheter-based coronary angiography if echocardiography induced mild or moderate ischemia. RESULTS OF SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS: Results were sensitive to changes in the probability of CAD and assumptions about false-positive results. LIMITATIONS: All cardiac stress imaging tests were assumed to be available. Exercise electrocardiography was included only in a sensitivity analysis. Differences in QALYs among strategies were small. CONCLUSION: Coronary CT angiography is a cost-effective triage test for 60-year-old patients who have nonacute chest pain and a low to intermediate probability of CAD. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Erasmus University Medical Center.