Key result
Primary angioplasty, unlike thrombolysis, is linked to ~21% lower 30-day mortality in older AMI patients.
Why the study?
Evidence supporting the efficacy of acute reperfusion (thrombolytic therapy or primary angioplasty) in older patients with suspected AMI was not as strong as in younger groups.
Does thrombolytic therapy or primary angioplasty improve survival compared to no reperfusion therapy in older patients with AMI?
Cohort (n=37,983)
Yes
Does thrombolytic therapy or primary angioplasty improve survival compared to no reperfusion therapy in older patients with AMI?
Odds Ratio: 1.01 (95% CI 0.94–1.09)
In older patients with AMI, primary angioplasty is associated with both 30-day and 1-year survival benefits, whereas thrombolytic therapy is only associated with a 1-year survival benefit compared to no reperfusion.
OBJECTIVES: We compared outcomes following thrombolytic therapy and primary angioplasty with no reperfusion therapy in a population-based cohort of older patients presenting with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) and indications for acute reperfusion. BACKGROUND: Evidence supporting the efficacy of acute reperfusion (thrombolytic therapy or primary angioplasty) in the elderly with suspected AMI is not as strong as it is in younger groups. METHODS: From a national cohort of Medicare beneficiaries with AMI, we identified 37,983 patients age 65 or older who presented within 12 h of symptom onset with ST elevation or left bundle branch block. A total of 14,341 (37.8%) received thrombolytic therapy and 1,599 (4.2%) underwent primary angioplasty within 6 h of hospital arrival. RESULTS: After adjustment for demographic, clinical, hospital and physician factors, and co-interventions, thrombolytic therapy was not associated with a better 30-day survival (odds ratio [OR] 1.01; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.94 to 1.09) compared with no therapy, whereas primary angioplasty was (OR 0.79; 95% CI: 0.66 to 0.94). At one year, both thrombolytic therapy (OR 0.84; 95% CI: 0.79 to 0.89) and primary angioplasty (OR 0.71; 95% CI: 0.61 to 0.83) were associated with a survival benefit. CONCLUSIONS: In this national sample of older patients, those who received thrombolytic therapy or primary angioplasty had lower mortality at one year compared with those who did not receive a reperfusion strategy. However, only primary angioplasty was associated with better survival at 30 days. Our findings should heighten interest in further investigating the best approach to the treatment of older patients with suspected AMI and ST segment elevation or left bundle branch block.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Berger et al. (2000) conducted a cohort in Acute myocardial infarction (n=37,983). Thrombolytic therapy or primary angioplasty vs. No reperfusion therapy was evaluated on 30-day survival (OR 1.01, 95% CI 0.94-1.09). In older patients with AMI, primary angioplasty was associated with better 30-day survival (OR 0.79; 95% CI 0.66-0.94) compared to no reperfusion, whereas thrombolytic therapy was not (OR 1.01).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: