Manejo invasivo y médico de síndromes isquémicos miocárdicos no agudos

Over the past two decades, approaches to managing patients with coronary artery disease have improved substantially with advances in percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery, pharmacological secondary prevention, anti-anginal agents and lifestyle interventions. Accordingly, clinical management choices in non-acute myocardial ischaemic syndromes (NAMIS) remain a timely and important topic. The risks and benefits of an invasive strategy combined with optimal medical therapy (OMT) versus a conservative strategy of OMT alone should be discussed with patients to facilitate shared clinical decision making. The findings from high-quality, randomized, controlled trials in the era of modern OMT form an essential platform for these informed conversations. In totality, the evidence from randomized, controlled trials supports OMT as the first-line therapeutic approach in patients with NAMIS, whereas selected patients at high anatomical risk or those with persistent anginal symptoms despite initial OMT often derive further symptom relief from invasive therapy with PCI. In patients with high-risk NAMIS, including those with multivessel disease and diabetes mellitus, CABG surgery improves survival, whereas the benefit is less clear for PCI. In this Review, we discuss the findings from contemporary trials evaluating outcomes in patients with NAMIS treated invasively or conservatively with OMT alone, and we conclude with proposed management pathways.