Search

Background: Whether a conservative strategy of medical therapy alone or a strategy of medical therapy plus invasive treatment is more beneficial in older adults with non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) remains unclear., Methods: We conducted a prospective, multicenter, randomized trial involving patients 75 years of age or older with NSTEMI at 48 sites in the United Kingdom. The patients were assigned in a 1:1 ratio to a conservative strategy of the best available medical therapy or an invasive strategy of coronary angiography and revascularization plus the best available medical therapy. Patients who were frail or had a high burden of coexisting conditions were eligible. The primary outcome was a composite of death from cardiovascular causes (cardiovascular death) or nonfatal myocardial infarction assessed in a time-to-event analysis., Results: A total of 1518 patients underwent randomization; 753 patients were assigned to the invasive-strategy group and 765 to the conservative-strategy group. The mean age of the patients was 82 years, 45% were women, and 32% were frail. A primary-outcome event occurred in 193 patients (25.6%) in the invasive-strategy group and 201 patients (26.3%) in the conservative-strategy group (hazard ratio, 0.94; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.77 to 1.14; P = 0.53) over a median follow-up of 4.1 years. Cardiovascular death occurred in 15.8% of the patients in the invasive-strategy group and 14.2% of the patients in the conservative-strategy group (hazard ratio, 1.11; 95% CI, 0.86 to 1.44). Nonfatal myocardial infarction occurred in 11.7% in the invasive-strategy group and 15.0% in the conservative-strategy group (hazard ratio, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.57 to 0.99). Procedural complications occurred in less than 1% of the patients., Conclusions: In older adults with NSTEMI, an invasive strategy did not result in a significantly lower risk of cardiovascular death or nonfatal myocardial infarction (the composite primary outcome) than a conservative strategy over a median follow-up of 4.1 years. (Funded by the British Heart Foundation; BHF SENIOR-RITA ISRCTN Registry number, ISRCTN11343602.)., (Copyright © 2024 Massachusetts Medical Society.)

This study investigated the impact of oral health on neurological disorders using the Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP). A total of 460 subjects completed the OHIP, including 141 control subjects who did not have any neurological conditions. Of the 319 subjects with a neurological diagnosis who were enrolled in the study, 31% had multiple sclerosis (MS), 34% had epilepsy, and 34% had other neurological conditions. Compared to the control group, mean age (p = .001), education (p = .003), and household income levels (p ≤ .001) were statistically significantly lower among subjects with epilepsy than in the other two groups. The majority of the study populations were Caucasian and the percentage was highest in those with MS (87%). Patients with any neurologic diagnosis had greater physical pain and disability than controls. Adjusting for demographic variables, the impact of physical disability was statistically significantly higher in patients with any neurological diagnosis (including MS and epilepsy) (OR = 4.49). In multinomial regression, the strongest association of physical disability impact was noted in patients with epilepsy (OR = 5.17). The physical disability domain of the OHIP is more commonly associated with a neurological diagnosis, including MS, and the association is strongest in patients with diagnosis of epilepsy., (© 2012 Special Care Dentistry Association and Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)