# Invasive Strategy in Octogenarians with Non-ST-Segment Elevation Acute Myocardial Infarction

## TL;DR

This paper discusses the challenges and considerations of using invasive treatment for heart attacks in patients over 80 years old.

## Contribution

The paper highlights the need for individualized treatment strategies in octogenarians with NSTEMI due to their unique risk profiles.

## Key findings

- Octogenarians with NSTEMI have complex risk factors that affect treatment outcomes.
- Invasive strategies may not always be beneficial due to higher complication risks in this age group.
- Prospective randomized trials are needed to guide treatment decisions for this population.

## Abstract

With population aging and the subsequent accumulation of cardiovascular risk
factors, a growing proportion of patients presenting with acute coronary syndrome
(ACS) are octogenarian (aged between 80 and 89). The marked heterogeneity of this
population is due to several factors like age, comorbidities, frailty, and other
geriatric conditions. All these variables have a strong impact on outcomes. In
addition, a high prevalence of multivessel disease, complex coronary anatomies,
and peripheral arterial disease, increases the risk of invasive procedures in
these patients. In advanced age, the type and duration of antithrombotic therapy
need to be individualized according to bleeding risk. Although an invasive
strategy for non-ST-segment elevation acute myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) is
recommended for the general population, its need is not so clear in
octogenarians. For instance, although frail patients could benefit from
revascularization, their higher risk of complications might change the
risk/benefit ratio. Age alone should not be the main factor to consider when
deciding the type of strategy. The risk of futility needs to be taken into
account and identification of risk factors for adverse outcomes, such as renal
impairment, could help in the decision-making process. Finally, an initially
selected conservative strategy should be open to a change to invasive management
depending on the clinical course (recurrent angina, ventricular arrhythmias,
heart failure). Further evidence, ideally from prospective randomized clinical
trials is urgent, as the population keeps growing.