Invasive Versus Conservative Management of NSTEMI Patients Aged ≥ 75 Years

Abstract Background The efficiency of invasive management in older patients (≥75 years) with non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) remains ambiguous. Objectives To assess the efficiency of invasive management in older patients with NSTEMI based on meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis (TSA). Methods Relevant randomized controlled trials (RCT) and observational studies were included. The primary outcomes were all-cause death, myocardial infarction, stroke, and major bleeding. Pooled odd ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated. P <0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results Five RCTs and 22 observational studies with 1017374 patients were included. Based on RCT and TSA results, invasive management was associated with lower risks of myocardial infarction (OR: 0.51; 95% CI: 0.40-0.65; I2=0%), major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE; OR: 0.61; 95% CI: 0.49-0.77; I2=27.0%), and revascularization (OR: 0.29; 95% CI: 0.15-0.55; I2=5.3%) compared with conservative management. Pooling results from RCTs and observational studies with multivariable adjustment showed consistently lower risks of all-cause death (OR: 0.57; 95% CI: 0.50-0.64; I2=86.4%), myocardial infarction (OR: 0.63; 95% CI: 0.56-0.71; I2=0%), stroke (OR: 0.59; 95% CI: 0.51-0.69; I2=0%), and MACE (OR: 0.64; 95% CI: 0.54-0.76; I2=43.4%). The better prognosis associated with invasive management was also observed in real-world scenarios. However, for patients aged ≥85 years, invasive management may increase the risk of major bleeding (OR: 2.68; 95% CI: 1.12-6.42; I2=0%). Conclusions Invasive management was associated with lower risks of myocardial infarction, MACE, and revascularization in older patients with NSTEMI, yet it may increase the risk of major bleeding in patients aged ≥85 years.