Routine invasive vs. conservative strategy in elderly patients with non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome

The optimal management of elderly patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS) remains uncertain. This systematic review assessed routine invasive versus conservative strategies in this population.

PubMed, Embase, and Scopus were searched through September 2024 for randomized controlled trials comparing both strategies. The primary outcome was major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE); secondary outcomes included all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, non-cardiovascular mortality, myocardial infarction, revascularization, stroke, and bleeding. Evidence certainty was evaluated using GRADE, and meta-analyses applied random-effects models.

Seven RCTs (n = 2,997; mean age 81-86 years; 49% female) were included. Invasive strategy reduced MACE risk (HR 0.77, 95% CI 0.65-0.92), with consistent point estimate direction across trials. Myocardial infarction (HR 0.70, 95% CI 0.59-0.84) and revascularization (HR 0.45, 95% CI 0.23-0.90) were also significantly reduced. No significant differences were observed for all-cause mortality (HR1.04, 95% CI 0.90-1.19), cardiovascular mortality (HR 1.10, 95% CI 0.86-1.41), stroke (HR 0.78, 95% CI 0.53-1.16), or bleeding (RR1.23, 95% CI 0.90-1.69). Evidence certainty was moderate for most outcomes.

In elderly NSTE-ACS patients, routine invasive strategy reduces cardiovascular events without significantly increasing bleeding, supporting individualized treatment decisions.

The protocol for this study was registered in the PROSPERO repository (CRD42024600769).