TerminatedNot Applicable

Evaluation of a Strategy Guided by Imaging Versus Systematic Coronary Angiography in Elderly Patients With Ischemia

Stopped: According interim analysis results

France588 participantsStarted 2018-04-04

Plain-language summary

The WHO predicts that cardiovascular morbi-mortality will increase by 120-137% within 20 years due to the aging population. Myocardial infarction without ST segment elevation (NSTEMI) is the most common form of infarction. However, its treatment among elderly patients remains a challenging question. Indeed, the risk benefit balance of revascularization remains unclear, and complications related to revascularization are more frequent in the elderly, including MI, heart failure, stroke, renal failure and bleeding according to National Cardiovascular Network data.The last randomized controlled trial "After Eighty Study", showed a reduction of major cardio-cerebrovascular events (MACCEs) in NSTEMI patients with an invasive strategy (systematic coronary angiography - CA) compared to a conservative strategy (medical treatment alone). Nevertheless, this study presented several limitations of which a major one was the lack of a definition of frailty at inclusion. Moreover, the "After Eighty Study" has shown that percutaneous revascularization in the invasive arm was only performed for 1 in 2 patients showing an inadequacy in the strategy for selecting candidates for revascularization. Consequently, despite European Society of Cardiology (ESC) guidelines, the management of NSTEMI in elderly patients is not yet evidence based, and current recommendations do not provide any clear clinical decision rule indicating one strategy over another. For fragile patients, an alternative strategy consists of selecting candidates for a guided CA according to the extent of myocardial ischemia, identified by non-invasive imaging. Single-photon emission computed tomography or dobutamine stress echocardiograms are currently the reference methods with well-defined interpretation of ischemia. According to our experience, this strategy avoids CA for one third of patients and improves the rate of revascularization. The aim of our study is to compare 1-year morbidity and mortality in NSTEMI patients over 80 years, assigned to guided versus systematic-CA. Our hypothesis is that the guided strategy will not be inferior on MACE rates at 1 year, and will be cost-effective by reducing iatrogenic complications.

Who can participate

Age range

80 Years

Sex

ALL

See this in plain English?

AI-rewrites the medical criteria so a patient or caregiver can understand them. Always confirm with the trial site.

Inclusion Criteria: * Patients aged 80 years or older * Hospitalized for NSTEMI with or without ST-segment depression on electrocardiogram (ECG), and with raised blood concentration of troponin T or I. Raised troponin was defined as a value exceeding the 99th percentile of a normal population at the local laboratory at each participating site. A local cardiologist assessed patient eligibility and clinical condition compatible with a doubt for systematic coronary angiography due to a frailty. * Written informed consent by the patient or the next of kin in case of incapacity. Non-inclusion criteria: * Recurrent or ongoing chest pain refractory to medical treatment * Haemodynamic instability or cardiogenic shock * Life-threatening arrhythmias or cardiac arrest * Contra-indication to CA: Renal failure (creatinine clearance \<15 mL/min by Modification of the Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD)), continuing bleeding problems * Mechanical complications of MI * Severe aortic stenosis * Medical history of severe dementia (documented for more than 3 months) * Patient under administrative or judicial control * Patient who are protected under the act * No health care insurance

Questions worth asking your doctor

Bring these to your next appointment. They're a starting point for a shared conversation — not a sign you qualify or a recommendation to enrol.

1Based on my diagnosis and history, is this trial worth exploring for me — or is there a standard treatment we should try first?
2What does this trial's phase tell us about how much is already known about its safety and benefit?
3What would taking part actually involve for me — visits, tests, time, and travel?
4What are the known and possible risks or side effects I should weigh, and how would they be monitored?
5If this trial isn't the right fit, what other options or trials would you suggest I look into?

Generated to help you prepare — always confirm anything about your own eligibility and care with the study team and your doctor.

Questions for the trial coordinator

The trial coordinator is the person who runs the study day to day. These cover the practical side — logistics, costs, and what taking part would actually mean for your life. The study team confirms whether you meet the criteria; these are questions to ask, not a sign you qualify.

1What does taking part actually involve week to week — how many visits, where, and how long does each one take?
2What costs are covered by the study, and what might I have to pay for myself, including travel, parking, or time off work?
3What happens during screening, and what happens if the study team confirms I don't meet the criteria after those tests?
4Who pays for the scans, blood work, and other tests the trial requires — the study, my insurance, or me?
5How will being in the trial affect my regular care, and will my own doctor stay informed and involved?
6Can I leave the trial at any point if I change my mind, and what would happen to my care if I do?

A starting point for the conversation — always confirm anything about your own eligibility, costs, and care with the study team and your doctor.

What they're measuring

Rate of MACCE

Timeframe: 12 months

Trial details

NCT IDNCT03289728

SponsorUniversity Hospital, Grenoble

Sponsor typeOTHER

Study typeINTERVENTIONAL

Primary completion2025-07-28

View on ClinicalTrials.gov More Myocardial Infarction trials