Percutaneous Coronary Interventions in the Elderly

Chapter
First Online:

Abstract

A new paradigm was recently proposed for the care of elderly patients with cardiovascular disease encompassing a patient-centered approach to care, screening for coexisting geriatric syndromes and comorbidities, purposeful management of pharmacologic regimen, and emphasis on the importance of transitions of care. More research is required on identifying the optimal timing and techniques for PCI in the elderly as well as for adjunctive pharmacologic therapy. This should include increased participation of elderly patients in ongoing and future PCI-related research studies and in studies examining hybrid surgical and percutaneous revascularization techniques. PCI in elderly patients carries higher risk, but can also provide significant benefits. In-depth communication with the patients about the goals, risks, benefits, and alternatives of PCI and careful attention to the procedural technique and to the selection of adjunctive medical therapy are key for optimizing the PCI outcomes in this large and expanding group of patients.

Keywords

Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Acute Coronary Syndrome Patient Syntax Score 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. 1.
    Jolly SS, Yusuf S, Cairns J, et al. Radial versus femoral access for coronary angiography and intervention in patients with acute coronary syndromes (RIVAL): a randomised, parallel group, multicentre trial. Lancet. 2011;377:1409–20.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Anderson JL, Adams CD, Antman EM, et al. 2011 ACCF/AHA focused update incorporated into the ACC/AHA 2007 guidelines for the management of patients with unstable angina/non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines. Circulation. 2011;123(18):e426–579.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 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;36:723–30.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Forman DE, Rich MW, Alexander KP, et al. Cardiac care for older adults: time for a new paradigm. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2011;57:1801–10.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Dauerman HL, Bhatt DL, Gretler DD, French PA, Smyth SS, Becker RC. Bridging the gap between clinical trials of antiplatelet therapies and applications among elderly patients. Am Heart J. 2010;159:508-17 e1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Wijns W, Kolh P, Danchin N, et al. Guidelines on myocardial revascularization: The Task Force on Myocardial Revascularization of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS). Eur Heart J. 2010;31:2501–55.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kiatchoosakun S, Keelapang P, Kaewsuwana P, Chotinaiwattarakul C, Piumsomboon C. Percutaneous coronary intervention in the elderly: results from the Thai National Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Registry (TPCIR). EuroIntervention. 2010;6:611–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Johnman C, Oldroyd KG, Mackay DF, et al. Percutaneous coronary intervention in the elderly: changes in case-mix and periprocedural outcomes in 31,758 patients treated between 2000 and 2007. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2010;3:341–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Singh M, Peterson ED, Roe MT, et al. Trends in the association between age and in-hospital mortality after percutaneous coronary intervention: National Cardiovascular Data Registry experience. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2009;2:20–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    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;141:186–95.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Jaber WA, Lennon RJ, Mathew V, Holmes Jr DR, Lerman A, Rihal CS. Application of evidence-based medical therapy is associated with improved outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention and is a valid quality indicator. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2005;46:1473–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Wang TY, Gutierrez A, Peterson ED. Percutaneous coronary intervention in the elderly. Nat Rev Cardiol. 2011;8:79–90.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Scheubel RJ, Zorn H, Silber RE, et al. Age-dependent depression in circulating endothelial progenitor cells in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2003;42:2073–80.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Singh M, Alexander K, Roger VL, et al. Frailty and its potential relevance to cardiovascular care. Mayo Clin Proc. 2008;83:1146–53.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Franchini M. Hemostasis and aging. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol. 2006;60:144–51.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Alexander KP, Chen AY, Roe MT, et al. Excess dosing of antiplatelet and antithrombin agents in the treatment of non–ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes. JAMA. 2005;294:3108–16.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hajjar ER, Cafiero AC, Hanlon JT. Polypharmacy in elderly patients. Am J Geriatr Pharmacother. 2007;5:345–51.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Tachjian A, Maria V, Jahangir A. Use of herbal products and potential interactions in patients with cardiovascular diseases. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2010;55:515–25.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Dick P, Barth B, Mlekusch W, et al. Complications after peripheral vascular interventions in octogenarians. J Endovasc Ther. 2008;15:383–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Valsecchi O, Musumeci G, Vassileva A, et al. Safety and feasibility of transradial coronary angioplasty in elderly patients. Ital Heart J. 2004;5:926–31.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Bertrand OF, Bagur R, Costerousse O, Rodes-Cabau J. Transradial vs femoral percutaneous coronary intervention for left main disease in octogenarians. Indian Heart J. 2010;62:234–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Hildick-Smith DJ, Walsh JT, Lowe MD, Petch MC. Coronary angiography in the fully anticoagulated patient: the transradial route is successful and safe. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2003;58:8–10.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Cooper L, Banerjee S, Brilakis ES. Crossover from radial to femoral access during a challenging percutaneous coronary intervention can make the difference between success and failure. Cardiovasc Revasc Med. 2010;11:266 e5-8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Sciahbasi A, Romagnoli E, Burzotta F, et al. Transradial approach (left vs right) and procedural times during percutaneous coronary procedures: TALENT study. Am Heart J. 2011;161:172–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    TIME investigators. Trial of invasive versus medical therapy in elderly patients with chronic symptomatic coronary-artery disease (TIME): a randomised trial. Lancet 2001;358:951–7.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Pfisterer M. Long-term outcome in elderly patients with chronic angina managed invasively versus by optimized medical therapy: four-year follow-up of the randomized Trial of Invasive versus Medical therapy in Elderly patients (TIME). Circulation. 2004;110:1213–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Graham MM, Ghali WA, Faris PD, Galbraith PD, Norris CM, Knudtson ML. Survival after coronary revascularization in the elderly. Circulation. 2002;105:2378–84.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Graham MM, Norris CM, Galbraith PD, Knudtson ML, Ghali WA. Quality of life after coronary revascularization in the elderly. Eur Heart J. 2006;27:1690–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Boden WE, O’Rourke RA, Teo KK, et al. Optimal medical therapy with or without PCI for stable coronary disease. N Engl J Med. 2007;356:1503–16.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Weintraub WS, Spertus JA, Kolm P, et al. Effect of PCI on quality of life in patients with stable coronary disease. N Engl J Med. 2008;359:677–87.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Li R, Yan BP, Dong M, et al. Quality of life after percutaneous coronary intervention in the elderly with acute coronary syndrome. Int J Cardiol. 2012;155:90–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Simoons ML, Maggioni AP, Knatterud G, et al. Individual risk assessment for intracranial haemorrhage during thrombolytic therapy. Lancet. 1993;342:1523–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Mehta RH, Sadiq I, Goldberg RJ, et al. Effectiveness of primary percutaneous coronary intervention compared with that of thrombolytic therapy in elderly patients with acute myocardial infarction. Am Heart J. 2004;147:253–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    de Boer SP, Westerhout CM, Simes RJ, Granger CB, Zijlstra F, Boersma E. Mortality and morbidity reduction by primary percutaneous coronary intervention is independent of the patient’s age. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2010;3:324–31.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Bauer T, Koeth O, Junger C, et al. Effect of an invasive strategy on in-hospital outcome in elderly patients with non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction. Eur Heart J. 2007;28:2873–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Saeed B, Banerjee S, Brilakis ES. Percutaneous coronary intervention in tortuous coronary arteries: associated complications and strategies to improve success. J Interv Cardiol. 2008;21:504–11.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Brilakis ES, Best PJ, Elesber AA, et al. Incidence, retrieval methods, and outcomes of stent loss during percutaneous coronary intervention: a large single-center experience. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2005;66:333–40.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Groeneveld PW, Matta MA, Greenhut AP, Yang F. Drug-eluting compared with bare-metal coronary stents among elderly patients. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2008;51:2017–24.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Douglas PS, Brennan JM, Anstrom KJ, et al. Clinical effectiveness of coronary stents in elderly persons: results from 262,700 Medicare patients in the American College of Cardiology-National Cardiovascular Data Registry. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2009;53:1629–41.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Forman DE, Cox DA, Ellis SG, et al. Long-term paclitaxel-eluting stent outcomes in elderly patients. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2009;2:178–87.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Brilakis ES, de Lemos JA, Cannon CP, et al. Outcomes of patients with acute coronary syndrome and previous coronary artery bypass grafting (from the Pravastatin or Atorvastatin Evaluation and Infection Therapy [PROVE IT-TIMI 22] and the Aggrastat to Zocor [A to Z] trials). Am J Cardiol. 2008;102:552–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Brilakis ES, Rao SV, Banerjee S, et al. Percutaneous coronary intervention in native arteries vs. bypass grafts in prior coronary bypass grafting patients: a report from NCDR. J Am Coll Cardiol Intv. 2011;4:844–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Smith Jr SC, Feldman TE, Hirshfeld Jr JW, et al. ACC/AHA/SCAI 2005 guideline update for percutaneous coronary intervention–summary article: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (ACC/AHA/SCAI Writing Committee to update the 2001 Guidelines for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention). Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2006;67:87–112.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Mehta SK, Frutkin AD, Milford-Beland S, et al. Utilization of distal embolic protection in saphenous vein graft interventions (an analysis of 19,546 patients in the American College of Cardiology-National Cardiovascular Data Registry). Am J Cardiol. 2007;100:1114–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Brilakis ES, Wang TY, Rao SV, et al. Frequency and predictors of drug-eluting stent use in saphenous vein bypass graft percutaneous coronary interventions: a report from the American College of Cardiology National Cardiovascular Data CathPCI Registry. J Am Coll Cardiol Intv. 2010;3:1068–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Brilakis ES, Lichtenwalter C, de Lemos JA, et al. A randomized controlled trial of a paclitaxel-eluting stent versus a similar bare-metal stent in saphenous vein graft lesions the SOS (Stenting of Saphenous Vein Grafts) trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2009;53:919–28.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Brilakis ES, Lichtenwalter C, Abdel-karim A-rR, et al. Continued benefit from paclitaxel-eluting compared with bare-metal stent implantation in saphenous vein graft lesions during long-term follow-up of the SOS (Stenting of Saphenous Vein Grafts) Trial. J Am Coll Cardiol Intv. 2011;4:176–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Vermeersch P, Agostoni P, Verheye S, et al. Randomized double-blind comparison of sirolimus-eluting stent versus bare-metal stent implantation in diseased saphenous vein grafts: six-month angiographic, intravascular ultrasound, and clinical follow-up of the RRISC Trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2006;48:2423–31.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Vermeersch P, Agostoni P, Verheye S, et al. Increased late mortality after sirolimus-eluting stents versus bare-metal stents in diseased saphenous vein grafts: results from the randomized DELAYED RRISC Trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2007;50:261–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Mehilli J, Pache J, Abdel-Wahab M, et al. Drug-eluting versus bare-metal stents in saphenous vein graft lesions (ISAR-CABG): a randomised controlled superiority trial. Lancet 2011;378:1071–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Morice MC, Serruys PW, Kappetein AP, et al. Outcomes in patients with de novo left main disease treated with either percutaneous coronary intervention using paclitaxel-eluting stents or coronary artery bypass graft treatment in the Synergy Between Percutaneous Coronary Intervention with TAXUS and Cardiac Surgery (SYNTAX) trial. Circulation. 2010;121:2645–53.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Palmerini T, Barlocco F, Santarelli A, et al. A comparison between coronary artery bypass grafting surgery and drug eluting stent for the treatment of unprotected left main coronary artery disease in elderly patients (aged > or =75 years). Eur Heart J. 2007;28:2714–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Lincoff AM, Kleiman NS, Kereiakes DJ, et al. Long-term efficacy of bivalirudin and provisional glycoprotein IIb/IIIa blockade vs heparin and planned glycoprotein IIb/IIIa blockade during percutaneous coronary revascularization: REPLACE-2 randomized trial. JAMA. 2004;292:696–703.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Lopes RD, Alexander KP, Manoukian SV, et al. Advanced age, antithrombotic strategy, and bleeding in non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes: results from the ACUITY (Acute Catheterization and Urgent Intervention Triage Strategy) trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2009;53:1021–30.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Boersma E, Harrington RA, Moliterno DJ, et al. Platelet glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors in acute coronary syndromes: a meta-analysis of all major randomised clinical trials. Lancet. 2002;359:189–98.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Kastrati A, Mehilli J, Neumann FJ, et al. Abciximab in patients with acute coronary syndromes undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention after clopidogrel pretreatment: the ISAR-REACT 2 randomized trial. JAMA. 2006;295:1531–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Giugliano RP, White JA, Bode C, et al. Early versus delayed, provisional eptifibatide in acute coronary syndromes. N Engl J Med. 2009;360:2176–90.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Mehta SR, Yusuf S, Peters RJ, et al. Effects of pretreatment with clopidogrel and aspirin followed by long-term therapy in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: the PCI-CURE study. Lancet. 2001;358:527–33.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Wiviott SD, Braunwald E, McCabe CH, et al. Prasugrel versus clopidogrel in patients with acute coronary syndromes. N Engl J Med. 2007;357:2001–15.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Wallentin L, Becker RC, Budaj A, et al. Ticagrelor versus clopidogrel in patients with acute coronary syndromes. N Engl J Med. 2009;361:1045–57.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Capodanno D, Angiolillo DJ. Antithrombotic therapy in the elderly. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2010;56:1683–92.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Mehta SR, Bassand JP, Chrolavicius S, et al. Dose comparisons of clopidogrel and aspirin in acute coronary syndromes. N Engl J Med. 2010;363:930–42.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Serebruany VL, Steinhubl SR, Berger PB, et al. Analysis of risk of bleeding complications after different doses of aspirin in 192,036 patients enrolled in 31 randomized controlled trials. Am J Cardiol. 2005;95:1218–22.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Segal R, Lubart E, Leibovitz A, et al. Early and late effects of low-dose aspirin on renal function in elderly patients. Am J Med. 2003;115:462–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Leon MB, Baim DS, Popma JJ, et al. A clinical trial comparing three antithrombotic-drug regimens after coronary-artery stenting. Stent Anticoagulation Restenosis Study Investigators. N Engl J Med. 1998;339:1665–71.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Khurram Z, Chou E, Minutello R, et al. Combination therapy with aspirin, clopidogrel and warfarin following coronary stenting is associated with a significant risk of bleeding. J Invasive Cardiol. 2006;18:162–4.PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.UT Southwestern Medical SchoolDallasUSA
  2. 2.Cardiac Catherterization LaboratoriesVA North Texas HealthcareDallasUSA
  3. 3.Division of CardiologyVA North Texas Healthcare SystemDallasUSA

Personalised recommendations