Batchelor, Wayne B

Background Older adults with non–ST‐segment–elevation acute coronary syndrome are less likely to undergo an invasive strategy compared with younger patients. Randomized controlled trials traditionally exclude older adults because of their high burden of geriatric conditions. Methods and Results We searched for randomized controlled trials comparing invasive versus medical management or a selective invasive (conservative) strategy for older patients (age≥75 years) with non–ST‐segment–elevation acute coronary syndrome. Fixed effects meta‐analysis was conducted to estimate the odds ratio (OR) with 95% CI for the composite of death or myocardial infarction (MI) and individual secondary end points of all‐cause death, cardiovascular death, MI, revascularization, stroke, and major bleeding. Nine studies with 2429 patients (invasive: 1228 versus control: 1201) with a mean follow‐up of 21 months were included. An invasive strategy was associated with a significantly decreased risk of a composite of death and MI (OR, 0.67 [95% CI, 0.54–0.83], P <0.001), MI (OR, 0.56 [95% CI, 0.45–0.70], P <0.001) and subsequent revascularization (OR, 0.27 [95% CI, 0.16–0.48], P <0.001). There was no difference in all‐cause death (OR, 0.84 [95% CI, 0.65–1.10], P =0.21), cardiovascular death (OR, 0.85 [95% CI, 0.63–1.15], P =0.30), stroke (OR, 0.74 [95% CI, 0.38–1.47], P =0.39), or major bleeding (OR, 1.24 [95% CI, 0.42–3.66], P =0.70). Conclusions In older patients ≥75 years old with non–ST‐segment–elevation acute coronary syndrome, an invasive strategy reduced the risk of a composite of death and MI, MI, and subsequent revascularization compared with a conservative strategy alone. Older adults with higher burden of geriatric conditions should be included in future trials to improve generalizability to this growing population.

AbstractCardiovascular disease (CVD) remains the leading cause of death in the United States. However, percutaneous interventional cardiovascular therapies are often underutilized in Blacks, Hispanics, and women and may contribute to excess morbidity and mortality in these vulnerable populations. The Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions (SCAI) is committed to reducing racial, ethnic, and sex‐based treatment disparities in interventional cardiology patients. Accordingly, each of the SCAI Clinical Interest Councils (coronary, peripheral, structural, and congenital heart disease [CHD]) participated in the development of this whitepaper addressing disparities in diagnosis, treatment, and outcomes in underserved populations. The councils were charged with summarizing the available data on prevalence, treatment, and outcomes and elucidating potential reasons for any disparities. Given the huge changes in racial and ethnic composition by age in the United States (Figure 1), it was difficult to determine disparities in rates of diagnosis and we expected to find some racial differences in prevalence of disease. For example, since the average age of patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is 80 years, one may expect 80% of TAVR patients to be non‐Hispanic White. Conversely, only 50% of congenital heart interventions would be expected to be performed in non‐Hispanic Whites. Finally, we identified opportunities for SCAI to advance clinical care and equity for our patients, regardless of sex, ethnicity, or race.