Key result
An invasive strategy in elderly patients with NSTEMI was associated with significantly lower in-hospital mortality compared to conservative treatment (adjusted OR 0.55; 95% CI 0.35-0.86).
Why the study?
Does an invasive strategy reduce mortality and myocardial infarction in elderly patients (≥75 years) with NSTEMI compared to conservative treatment?
Population
1,936 elderly patients with non-ST elevation myocardial infarction prospectively enrolled in the German…
Comparison
Invasive strategy vs Conservative treatment
Design
Cohort
Follow-up
in-hospital and 1 year
Authors
Loading...
May support invasive strategy in elderly NSTEMI; leaves open randomized confirmation of mortality benefit.
Cohort (n=1,936)
Yes
Does an invasive strategy reduce mortality and myocardial infarction in elderly patients (≥75 years) with NSTEMI compared to conservative treatment?
Odds Ratio: 0.55 (95% CI 0.35–0.86)
Absolute Event Rate: 6% vs 12.5%
p-value: p=<0.0001
In elderly patients with NSTEMI, an invasive strategy is associated with significantly reduced in-hospital and 1-year mortality compared to conservative management, despite a trend toward increased bleeding.
Bauer et al. (2007) conducted a cohort in non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) (n=1,936). Invasive strategy vs. Conservative treatment was evaluated on In-hospital mortality (OR 0.55, 95% CI 0.35-0.86, p=<0.0001). An invasive strategy in elderly patients with NSTEMI was associated with significantly lower in-hospital mortality compared to conservative treatment (adjusted OR 0.55; 95% CI 0.35-0.86).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: