Key result
Reperfusion therapy in elderly STEMI patients has incomplete evidence regarding benefits and risks, highlighting the need for further clinical trials in this population.
Why the study?
What are the benefits and risks of different reperfusion therapies in elderly patients with STEMI?
What are the benefits and risks of different reperfusion therapies in elderly patients with STEMI?
This review highlights the incomplete evidence base for reperfusion strategies in elderly STEMI patients and provides practical recommendations based on current knowledge.
Incomplete evidence limits confident reperfusion choices in elderly STEMI; leaves open optimal strategies for dedicated trials.
In this paper the current knowledge of reperfusion therapy in elderly patients with an ST-segment elevation acute myocardial infarction (STEMI) is summarised. Placebo-controlled trials of fibrinolytic agents, direct comparative trials of fibrinolytic agents and antithrombotic co-therapies, and randomised trials of primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) versus fibrinolytic therapy as well as registries are briefly reviewed, focusing on the impact of age. The benefit and risk of a combined pharma-cological and mechanical approach is presented. Important differences between a "facilitated PCI" and a "pharmaco-invasive strategy", particularly in older STEMI patients, are highlighted. It will become clear at the end of this review that the knowledge about the benefit and risk of reperfusion therapy in the elderly is still incomplete and that more clinical trials in the elderly are needed. Practical recommendations for elderly patients with STEMI based on the current knowledge have been provided.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Frans Van de Werf (2018) conducted a review in ST-segment elevation acute myocardial infarction (STEMI). Reperfusion therapy was evaluated. Reperfusion therapy in elderly STEMI patients has incomplete evidence regarding benefits and risks, highlighting the need for further clinical trials in this population.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: