Cargando…
Comparing health outcomes between coronary interventions in frail patients aged 75 years or older with acute coronary syndrome: a systematic review
PURPOSE: To assess current evidence comparing the impact of available coronary interventions in frail patients aged 75 years or older with different subtypes of acute coronary syndrome (ACS) on health outcomes. METHODS: Scopus, Embase and PubMed were systematically searched in May 2022 for studies c...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer International Publishing
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9553773/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35908241 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s41999-022-00667-9 |
_version_ | 1784806554052067328 |
---|---|
author | van Wyk, Gregory W. Berkovsky, Shlomo Fraile Navarro, David Coiera, Enrico |
author_facet | van Wyk, Gregory W. Berkovsky, Shlomo Fraile Navarro, David Coiera, Enrico |
author_sort | van Wyk, Gregory W. |
collection | PubMed |
description | PURPOSE: To assess current evidence comparing the impact of available coronary interventions in frail patients aged 75 years or older with different subtypes of acute coronary syndrome (ACS) on health outcomes. METHODS: Scopus, Embase and PubMed were systematically searched in May 2022 for studies comparing outcomes between coronary interventions in frail older patients with ACS. Studies were excluded if they provided no objective assessment of frailty during the index admission, under-represented patients aged 75 years or older, or included patients with non-ACS coronary disease without presenting results for the ACS subgroup. Following data extraction from the included studies, a qualitative synthesis of results was undertaken. RESULTS: Nine studies met all eligibility criteria. All eligible studies were observational. Substantial heterogeneity was observed across study designs regarding ACS subtypes included, frailty assessments used, coronary interventions compared, and outcomes studied. All studies were assessed to be at high risk of bias. Notably, adjustment for confounders was limited or not adequately reported in all studies. The comparative assessment suggested a possible efficacy signal for invasive treatment relative to conservative treatment but possibly at the risk of increased bleeding events. CONCLUSIONS: There is a paucity of evidence comparing health outcomes between different coronary interventions in frail patients aged 75 years or older with ACS. Available evidence is at high risk of bias. Given the growing importance of ACS in frail patients aged 75 years or older, new studies are needed to inform optimal ACS care for this population. Future studies should rigorously adjust for confounders. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9553773 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Springer International Publishing |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-95537732022-10-13 Comparing health outcomes between coronary interventions in frail patients aged 75 years or older with acute coronary syndrome: a systematic review van Wyk, Gregory W. Berkovsky, Shlomo Fraile Navarro, David Coiera, Enrico Eur Geriatr Med Review PURPOSE: To assess current evidence comparing the impact of available coronary interventions in frail patients aged 75 years or older with different subtypes of acute coronary syndrome (ACS) on health outcomes. METHODS: Scopus, Embase and PubMed were systematically searched in May 2022 for studies comparing outcomes between coronary interventions in frail older patients with ACS. Studies were excluded if they provided no objective assessment of frailty during the index admission, under-represented patients aged 75 years or older, or included patients with non-ACS coronary disease without presenting results for the ACS subgroup. Following data extraction from the included studies, a qualitative synthesis of results was undertaken. RESULTS: Nine studies met all eligibility criteria. All eligible studies were observational. Substantial heterogeneity was observed across study designs regarding ACS subtypes included, frailty assessments used, coronary interventions compared, and outcomes studied. All studies were assessed to be at high risk of bias. Notably, adjustment for confounders was limited or not adequately reported in all studies. The comparative assessment suggested a possible efficacy signal for invasive treatment relative to conservative treatment but possibly at the risk of increased bleeding events. CONCLUSIONS: There is a paucity of evidence comparing health outcomes between different coronary interventions in frail patients aged 75 years or older with ACS. Available evidence is at high risk of bias. Given the growing importance of ACS in frail patients aged 75 years or older, new studies are needed to inform optimal ACS care for this population. Future studies should rigorously adjust for confounders. Springer International Publishing 2022-07-31 2022 /pmc/articles/PMC9553773/ /pubmed/35908241 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s41999-022-00667-9 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Review van Wyk, Gregory W. Berkovsky, Shlomo Fraile Navarro, David Coiera, Enrico Comparing health outcomes between coronary interventions in frail patients aged 75 years or older with acute coronary syndrome: a systematic review |
title | Comparing health outcomes between coronary interventions in frail patients aged 75 years or older with acute coronary syndrome: a systematic review |
title_full | Comparing health outcomes between coronary interventions in frail patients aged 75 years or older with acute coronary syndrome: a systematic review |
title_fullStr | Comparing health outcomes between coronary interventions in frail patients aged 75 years or older with acute coronary syndrome: a systematic review |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparing health outcomes between coronary interventions in frail patients aged 75 years or older with acute coronary syndrome: a systematic review |
title_short | Comparing health outcomes between coronary interventions in frail patients aged 75 years or older with acute coronary syndrome: a systematic review |
title_sort | comparing health outcomes between coronary interventions in frail patients aged 75 years or older with acute coronary syndrome: a systematic review |
topic | Review |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9553773/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35908241 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s41999-022-00667-9 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT vanwykgregoryw comparinghealthoutcomesbetweencoronaryinterventionsinfrailpatientsaged75yearsorolderwithacutecoronarysyndromeasystematicreview AT berkovskyshlomo comparinghealthoutcomesbetweencoronaryinterventionsinfrailpatientsaged75yearsorolderwithacutecoronarysyndromeasystematicreview AT frailenavarrodavid comparinghealthoutcomesbetweencoronaryinterventionsinfrailpatientsaged75yearsorolderwithacutecoronarysyndromeasystematicreview AT coieraenrico comparinghealthoutcomesbetweencoronaryinterventionsinfrailpatientsaged75yearsorolderwithacutecoronarysyndromeasystematicreview |