Zuhdi Ahmad Syadi Mahmood, Ahmad Wan Azman Wan, Zaki Rafdzah Ahmad, Mariapun Jeevitha, Ali Rosli Mohd, Sari Norashikin Md, Ismail Muhammad Dzafir, Kui Hian Sim
Department of Internal Medicine, University Malaya Medical Centre, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
Department of Social and Preventive Medicine, University Malaya Medical Centre, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
Singapore Med J. 2016 Apr;57(4):191-7. doi: 10.11622/smedj.2015145. Epub 2015 Oct 16.
The elderly are often underrepresented in clinical trials for acute coronary syndrome (ACS), and cardiologists commonly face management dilemmas in the choice of treatment for this group of patients, particularly concerning the use of invasive revascularisation. This study analysed the characteristics of hospitalised elderly patients with ACS, and compared the outcomes of treatments.
From 29 December 2005 to 26 April 2010, 13,545 patients were admitted for ACS in 16 hospitals across Malaysia. These patients were divided into two groups - elderly (≥ 65 years) and non-elderly (< 65 years). The clinical characteristics, treatment received (invasive or non-invasive) and outcomes (in-hospital and 30-day all-cause mortality) of the two groups were compared. The elderly patients were then grouped according to the type of treatment received, and the outcomes of the two subgroups were compared.
Elderly patients had a higher cardiovascular risk burden and a higher incidence of comorbidities. They were less likely to receive urgent revascularisation for acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (elderly: 73.9% vs. non-elderly: 81.4%) and had longer door-to-needle time (elderly: 60 minutes vs. non-elderly: 50 minutes, p = 0.004). The rate of cardiac catheterisation was significantly lower in the elderly group across all ACS strata. Elderly patients had poorer outcomes than non-elderly patients, but those who received invasive treatment appeared to have better outcomes than those who received non-invasive treatment.
Elderly patients with ACS tend to be undertreated, both invasively and pharmacologically. Invasive treatment seems to yield better outcomes for this group of patients.
在急性冠状动脉综合征(ACS)的临床试验中,老年人往往占比不足,心脏病专家在为这组患者选择治疗方案时通常面临管理困境,尤其是在侵入性血运重建的使用方面。本研究分析了住院老年ACS患者的特征,并比较了治疗结果。
2005年12月29日至2010年4月26日,马来西亚16家医院的13545例患者因ACS入院。这些患者被分为两组——老年组(≥65岁)和非老年组(<65岁)。比较两组的临床特征、接受的治疗(侵入性或非侵入性)及结果(院内和30天全因死亡率)。然后根据老年患者接受的治疗类型进行分组,并比较两个亚组的结果。
老年患者有更高的心血管风险负担和更高的合并症发生率。他们因急性ST段抬高型心肌梗死接受紧急血运重建的可能性较小(老年组:73.9% vs. 非老年组:81.4%),且门到针时间更长(老年组:60分钟 vs. 非老年组:50分钟,p = 0.004)。在所有ACS分层中,老年组的心脏导管插入率显著更低。老年患者的治疗结果比非老年患者差,但接受侵入性治疗的患者似乎比接受非侵入性治疗的患者结果更好。
老年ACS患者在侵入性治疗和药物治疗方面往往治疗不足。侵入性治疗似乎对这组患者产生更好的结果。