Koronarinterventionen im höheren Lebensalter beim akuten Koronarsyndrom - Wann ist ein konservatives, wann ein invasives Vorgehen angezeigt?

Die perkutane Koronarintervention (PCI) ist ein sicheres und effektives Verfahren zur Wiederherstellung der Myokardperfusion. Allerdings steigt mit zunehmendem Alter das Komplikationsrisiko des Verfahrens. Vorteilhaft kann das invasive Vorgehen beim akuten Koronarsyndrom dennoch auch bei älteren Patienten sein - insbesondere wenn ein ST-Strecken-Hebungsinfarkt vorliegt -, während bei der stabilen koronaren Herzkrankheit eine konservative der invasiven Therapie bezüglich der Prognose ebenbürtig ist. Bei der individuellen Entscheidung für oder gegen eine interventionelle Behandlung sollten neben dem biologischen Alter, die Begleiterkrankungen sowie die Koronaranatomie eines jeden Patienten mit in die Entscheidung einfließen.

Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is a safe and effective procedure to reconstitute myocardial perfusion. With advancing age patients face a higher risk for complications of PCI. In elderly patients with acute coronary syndromes especially those with STEMI an invasive strategy with PCI improves the prognosis, whereas in stable coronary heart disease a conservative approach is equally effective. Individual decisions in favour of or contrary to an interventional treatment should be based on the biological age, concomitant diseases and coronary anatomy of the patient.

percutaneous coronary intervention - age - complications - acute coronary syndromes

Literatur

• 1 Antmann EM, Anbe DT, Armstrong PW. et al. . ACC/AHA guidelines for the management of patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction - executive summary: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (Writing Committee to Revise the 1999 Guidelines for the Management of Patients With Acute Myocardial Infarction).  Circulation. 2004;  110
• 2 Bach RG, Cannon CP, Weintraub WS. et al. . The effect of routine, early invasive management on outcome for elderly patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes.  Ann Intern Med. 2004;  141 186-195
• 3 Batchelor WB, Anstrom KJ, Muhlbaier LH. et al. . Contemporary outcome trends in the elderly undergoing percutaneous coronary interventions: results in 7,472 octogenarians. National Cardiovascular Network Collaboration.  J Am Coll Cardiol. 2000;  36 723-730
• 4 Braunwald E, Antman EM, Beasley JW. et al. . ACC/AHA guideline update for the management of patients with unstable angina and non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction - 2002: summary article: a report of the American College of Cardiology/ American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (Committee on the Management of Patients With Unstable Angina).  Circulation. 2002;  106 1893-1900
• 5 De Servi S, Cavallini C, Dellavalle A. et al. . Non-ST-Elevation acute coronary syndrome in the elderly: treatment strategies and 30-day outcome.  Am Heart. 2004;  147 830-836
• 6 Feldman DN, Gade CL, Slotwiner AJ. et al. . New York State Angioplasty. Comparison of outcomes of percutaneous coronary interventions in patients of three age groups (< 60, 60 to 80, and > 80 years) (from the New York State Angioplasty Registry).  Am J Cardiol. 2006;  98 1334-1339
• 7 Graham MM, Ghali WA, Faris PD. et al. . Survival after coronary revascularization in the elderly.  Circulation. 2002;  105 2378-2384
• 8 Grines C.. TCT 2005
• 9 Metha RH, Granger CB, Alexander KP. et al. . Reperfusion strategies for acute myocardial infarction in the elderly: benefits and risks.  J Am Coll Cardiol. 2005;  45 471-478
• 10 Pfisterer M, Buser P, Osswald S. et al. . Outcome of elderly patients with chronic symptomatic coronary artery disease with an invasive vs optimized medical treatment strategy: one-year results of the randomized TIME trial.  JAMA. 2003;  289 1117-1123
• 11 Silber S, Albertsson P, Avilés FF. et al. . Guidelines for percutaneous coronary interventions. The Task Force for Percutaneous Coronary Interventions of the European Society of Cardiology.  Eur Heart J. 2005;  26 804-847
• 12 Yusuf S, Flather M, Pogue J. et al. . Variations between countries in invasive cardiac procedures and outcomes in patients with suspected unstable angina or myocardial infarction without initial ST elevation. OASIS (Organisation to Assess Strategies for Ischaemic Syndromes) Registry Investigators.  Lancet. 1998;  352 507-514
• 13 Zahn R, Schiele R, Schneider S. et al. . Primary angioplasty versus intravenous thrombolysis in acute myocardial infarction: can we define subgroups of patients benefiting most from primary angioplasty? Results from the pooled data of the Maximal Individual Therapy in Acute Myocardial Infarction Registry and the Myocardial Infarction Registry.  J Am Coll Cardiol. 2001;  37 1827-1835
• 14 Zijlstra F, Patel A, Jones M. et al. . Clinical characteristics and outcome of patients with early (< 2 h), intermediate (2-4 h) and late (> 4 h) presentation treated by primary coronary angioplasty or thrombolytic therapy for acute myocardial infarction.  Eur Heart J. 2002;  23 550-557
• 15 Zeymer U, Gitt A, Winkler R. et al. . Sterblichkeit bei über 75-jährigen Patienten mit akutem ST-Hebungsmyokardinfarkt im klinischen Alltag.  Dtsch Med Wochenschr. 2005;  130 633-636
• 16 Zeymer U, Zahn R, Hochadel M. et al. . Indications and complications of invasive diagnostic procedures and percutaneous coronary interventions in the year 2003. Results of the quality control registry of the Arbeitsgemeinschaft Leitende Kardiologische Krankenhausarzte (ALKK).  Z Kardiol. 2005;  94 392-398

1 Trial of Invasive versus Medical therapy in Elderly patients

2 Treat Angina with Aggrastat and determine Cost of Therapy with an Invasive or Conservative Strategy - Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction

3 Maximal Individual Therapy in Acute Myocardial Infarction

4 Primary Angioplasty in Myocardial Infarction in the elderly

5 Arbeitsgemeinschaft Leitender Kardiologischer Krankenhausärzte

Korrespondenz