Conservative management in very elderly patients with severe aortic stenosis: Time to change?

Despite current recommendations, a high percentage of patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis are managed conservatively. The aim of this study was to study symptomatic patients undergoing conservative management from the IDEAS registry, describing their baseline clinical characteristics, mortality, and the causes according to the reason for conservative management. Consecutive patients with severe aortic stenosis diagnosed at 48 centers during January 2014 were included. Baseline clinical characteristics, echocardiographic data, Charlson index, and EuroSCORE-II were registered, including vital status and performance of valve intervention during one-year follow-up. For the purpose of this substudy we assessed symptomatic patients undergoing conservative management, including them in 5 groups according to the reason for performing conservative management [I: comorbidity/frailty (128, 43.8%); II: dementia 18 (6.2%); III: advanced age 34 (11.6%); IV: patients’ refusal 62 (21.2%); and V: other reasons 50 (17.1%)]. We included 292 patients aged 81.5 ± 9 years. Patients from group I had higher Charlson index (4 ± 2.3), higher EuroSCORE-II (7.5 ± 6), and a higher overall (42.2%) and non-cardiac mortality (16.4%) than the other groups. In contrast, patients from group III had fewer comorbidities, lower EuroSCORE-II (4 ± 2.5), and low overall (20.6%) and non-cardiac mortality (5.9%). Patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis managed conservatively have different baseline characteristics and clinical course according to the reason for performing conservative management. A prospective assessment of comorbidity and other geriatric syndromes might contribute to improve therapeutic strategy in this clinical setting.

Early intravenous beta-blockers in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction before primary percutaneous coronary intervention

The impact of intravenous (IV) beta-blockers before primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI) on infarct size and clinical outcomes is not well established. This study sought to conduct the first double-blind, placebo-controlled international multicenter study testing the effect of early IV beta-blockers before PPCI in a general ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) population. STEMI patients presenting <12 h from symptom onset in Killip class I to II without atrioventricular block were randomized 1:1 to IV metoprolol (2 × 5-mg bolus) or matched placebo before PPCI. Primary endpoint was myocardial infarct size as assessed by cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) at 30 days. Secondary endpoints were enzymatic infarct size and incidence of ventricular arrhythmias. Safety endpoints included symptomatic bradycardia, symptomatic hypotension, and cardiogenic shock. A total of 683 patients (mean age 62 ± 12 years; 75% male) were randomized to metoprolol (n = 336) or placebo (n = 346). CMR was performed in 342 patients (54.8%). Infarct size (percent of left ventricle [LV]) by CMR did not differ between the metoprolol (15.3 ± 11.0%) and placebo groups (14.9 ± 11.5%; p = 0.616). Peak and area under the creatine kinase curve did not differ between both groups. LV ejection fraction by CMR was 51.0 ± 10.9% in the metoprolol group and 51.6 ± 10.8% in the placebo group (p = 0.68). The incidence of malignant arrhythmias was 3.6% in the metoprolol group versus 6.9% in placebo (p = 0.050). The incidence of adverse events was not different between groups. In a nonrestricted STEMI population, early intravenous metoprolol before PPCI was not associated with a reduction in infarct size. Metoprolol reduced the incidence of malignant arrhythmias in the acute phase and was not associated with an increase in adverse events.