ABSTRACT
Importance: The MOSCA-FRAIL randomized clinical trial compared invasive and conservative treatment strategies in patients with frailty with non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI). It showed no differences in the number of days alive and out of the hospital at 1 year. Objective: To assess the outcomes of the MOSCA-FRAIL trial during extended follow-up. Design, Setting, and Participants: The MOSCA-FRAIL randomized clinical trial was conducted at 13 hospitals in Spain between July 7, 2017, and January 9, 2021, and included 167 adults (aged ≥70 years) with frailty (Clinical Frailty Scale score ≥4) and NSTEMI. In this preplanned secondary analysis, follow-up was extended to January 31, 2023. Data analysis was performed from April 5 to 29, 2023, using the intention-to-treat principle. Interventions: Patients were randomized to a routine invasive (coronary angiography and revascularization if feasible [n = 84]) or a conservative (medical treatment with coronary angiography only if recurrent ischemia [n = 83]) strategy. Main outcomes and measures: The primary end point was the difference in restricted mean survival time (RMST). Secondary end points included readmissions for any cause, considering recurrent readmissions. Results: Among the 167 patients included in the analysis, the mean (SD) age was 86 (5) years; 79 (47.3%) were men and 88 (52.7%) were women. A total of 93 deaths and 367 readmissions accrued. The RMST for all-cause death over the entire follow-up was 3.13 (95% CI, 2.72-3.60) years in the invasive and 3.06 (95% CI, 2.84-3.32) years in the conservative treatment groups. The RMST analysis showed inconclusive differences in survival time (invasive minus conservative difference, 28 [95% CI, -188 to 230] days). Patients under invasive treatment tended to have shorter survival in the first year (-28 [95% CI, -63 to 7] days), which improved after the first year (192 [95% CI, 90-230] days). Kaplan-Meier mortality curves intersected, displaying higher mortality to 1 year in the invasive group that shifted to a late benefit (landmark analysis hazard ratio, 0.58 [95% CI, 0.33-0.99]; P = .045). Early harm was more evident in the subgroup with a Clinical Frailty Scale score greater than 4. No differences were found for the secondary end points. Conclusions and Relevance: In this extended follow-up of a randomized clinical trial of patients with frailty and NSTEMI, an invasive treatment strategy did not improve outcomes at a median follow-up of 1113 (IQR, 443-1441) days. However, a differential distribution of deaths was observed, with early harm followed by later benefit. The phenomenon of depletion of susceptible patients may be responsible for this behavior. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03208153.
Subject(s)
Frailty , Non-ST Elevated Myocardial Infarction , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction , Female , Humans , Male , Conservative Treatment , Coronary Angiography , Data Analysis , Non-ST Elevated Myocardial Infarction/therapy , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Multicenter Studies as TopicABSTRACT
INTRODUCCIÓN Y OBJETIVOS: En endocarditis infecciosa (EI), la decisión quirúrgica es difícil. Un alto porcentaje de pacientes con indicación quirúrgica no son intervenidos. El objetivo fue evaluar el pronóstico a corto y largo plazo de los pacientes con indicación quirúrgica, comparando los que se sometieron a cirugía con los que no lo hicieron. MÉTODOS: Se incluyeron 271 pacientes con EI izquierda e indicación quirúrgica tratados en el centro desde 2003 a 2018. Ochenta y tres pacientes (31%) no fueron finalmente operados. El objetivo primario fue la mortalidad a 60 días y el secundario desde el día 61 a los 3 años de seguimiento. Se realizó regresión de Cox multivariable y emparejamiento por puntuación de propensión. RESULTADOS: A los 60 días, 40 (21,3%) pacientes operados y 53 (63,9%) pacientes no intervenidos fallecieron (p <0,001). El riesgo de mortalidad a 60 días fue superior en los pacientes no intervenidos (HR = 3,59; IC95%, 2,16-5,96; p <0,001). La ausencia de diagnóstico microbiológico, la insuficiencia cardiaca, el shock y el bloqueo auriculoventricular fueron otros predictores independientes del objetivo primario. Del día 61 a los 3 años del seguimiento no hubo diferencias significativas del riesgo de muerte entre el grupo operado y los no intervenidos (HR = 1,89; IC95%, 0,68-5,19; p = 0,220). Las variables independientes asociadas con el objetivo secundario fueron los antecedentes de EI, diabetes mellitus y el índice de Charlson. Los resultados fueron consistentes tras el emparejamiento por puntuación de propensión. CONCLUSIONES: Dos tercios de los pacientes con indicación quirúrgica no intervenidos fallecieron antes de 60 días. Entre los supervivientes, la mortalidad a largo plazo depende más de factores relacionados con comorbilidad previa que del tratamiento recibido durante el ingreso
INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: In infective endocarditis (IE), decisions on surgical interventions are challenging and a high percentage of patients with surgical indication do not undergo these procedures. This study aimed to evaluate the short- and long-term prognosis of patients with surgical indication, comparing those who underwent surgery with those who did not. METHODS: We included 271 patients with left-sided IE treated at our institution from 2003 to 2018 and with an indication for surgery. There were 83 (31%) surgery-indicated not undergoing surgery patients with left-sided infective endocarditis (SINUS-LSIE). The primary outcome was all-cause death by day 60 and the secondary outcome was all-cause death from day 61 to 3 years of follow-up. Multivariable Cox regression and propensity score matching were used for the analysis. RESULTS: At the 60-day follow-up, 40 (21.3%) surgically-treated patients and 53 (63.9%) SINUS-LSIE patients died (P <.001). Risk of 60-day mortality was higher in SINUS-LSIE patients (HR, 3.59; 95%CI, 2.16-5.96; P <.001). Other independent predictors of the primary endpoint were unknown etiology, heart failure, atrioventricular block, and shock. From day 61 to the 3-year follow-up, there were no significant differences in the risk of death between surgically-treated and SINUS-LSIE patients (HR, 1.89; 95%CI, 0.68-5.19; P=.220). Results were consistent after propensity score matching. Independent variables associated with the secondary endpoint were previous IE, diabetes mellitus, and Charlson index. CONCLUSIONS: Two-thirds of SINUS-LSIE patients died within 60 days. Among survivors, the long-term mortality depends more on host conditions than on the treatment received during admission
Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Female , Middle Aged , Aged , Endocarditis, Bacterial/mortality , Cardiac Surgical Procedures/statistics & numerical data , Prosthesis-Related Infections/mortality , Endocarditis, Bacterial/complications , Long Term Adverse Effects/epidemiology , Prognosis , Treatment Refusal/statistics & numerical data , Patient Acceptance of Health Care/statistics & numerical data , Prospective StudiesABSTRACT
Introducción y objetivos: Aunque las guías de práctica clínica recomiendan una estrategia invasiva para el infarto agudo de miocardio sin elevación del segmento ST (IAMSEST), en la práctica clínica esta estrategia se infrautiliza en ancianos frágiles. Además estos enfermos habitualmente quedan excluidos de los ensayos clínicos, por lo que la evidencia es escasa. Nuestra hipótesis es que una estrategia invasiva para el anciano con fragilidad y IAMSEST mejorará el pronóstico. Métodos: Se trata de un estudio prospectivo, multicéntrico y aleatorizado que compara una estrategia invasiva frente a una conservadora en ancianos frágiles con IAMSEST. Los criterios de inclusión son: IAMSEST, edad ≥ 70 años y fragilidad definida por al menos 4 criterios de la escala Clinical Frailty Scale. Se aleatorizará a los participantes a una estrategia invasiva (coronariografía y revascularización si se considera anatómicamente indicada) o conservadora (tratamiento médico y coronariografía solo en caso de inestabilidad clínica persistente). El objetivo principal será el número de días vivo fuera del hospital durante el primer año. El objetivo coprincipal será el tiempo hasta la presentación de muerte cardiovascular, reinfarto agudo de miocardio o revascularización tras el alta. El tamaño de la muestra estimado es de 178 pacientes (89 por grupo), asumiendo un incremento del 20% en la proporción de días vivo fuera del hospital con la estrategia invasiva. Resultados: Los resultados del estudio aportarán información novedosa para el tratamiento del anciano frágil con IAMSEST. Conclusiones: Nuestra hipótesis es que una estrategia invasiva mejorará el pronóstico de los pacientes ancianos frágiles con IAMSEST. Si esta hipótesis se confirmara, la situación de fragilidad no debería disuadir al cardiólogo de indicar un tratamiento invasivo. Ensayo registrado en ClinicalTrials.gov (Identificador: NCT03208153)
Introduction and objectives: Although clinical guidelines recommend invasive management in non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI), this strategy is underused in frail elderly patients in the real world. Furthermore, these patients are underrepresented in clinical trials and therefore the evidence is scarce. Our hypothesis is that an invasive strategy will improve prognosis in elderly frail patients with NSTEMI. Methods: This will be a prospective, multicenter, randomized trial, in which the conservative and invasive strategies will be compared in patients meeting all of the following inclusion criteria: NSTEMI diagnosis, age ≥ 70 years, and frailty defined by a category ≥ 4 in the Clinical Frailty Scale. Participants will be randomized to an invasive (coronary angiogram and revascularization if anatomically amenable) or conservative (medical treatment and coronary angiogram only if persistent clinical instability) strategy. The primary endpoint will be the number of days alive out of hospital during the first year. The coprimary endpoint will be the time until the first cardiac event (cardiac death, reinfarction or postdischarge revascularization). We estimate a sample size of 178 patients (89 per arm), considering an increase of 20% in the proportion of days alive out of hospital with the invasive management. Results: The results of this study will add important knowledge to inform the management of frail elderly patients hospitalized with NSTEMI. Conclusions: We hypothesize that the invasive strategy will improve outcomes in frail elderly patients with NSTEMI. If this is confirmed, frailty status should not dissuade physicians from implementing an invasive management strategy. Clinical trial registration: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov .Identifier: NCT03208153