ArticleJournal of geriatric cardiology : JGC2013
Percutaneous coronary intervention in nonagenarians: pros and cons.
Article in Journal of geriatric cardiology : JGC, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 36 citations in OpenAlex.
- Different Techniques of Surgical Left Atrial Appendage Closure and Their Efficacy: A Systematic Review.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2023Pooled it
- Percutaneous coronary intervention in nonagenarians with acute myocardial infarction: a 15-year population-based study.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Percutaneous Coronary Interventions in Nonagenarians: Single-Centre Insights.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Diagnosis and Management of a Large RCA Aneurysm Treated With IVUS-Guided PCI Using Covered Stents.JACC. Case reports · 2025Article
- Cardiac Surgery in Nonagenarians Following the TAVI/TMVI Era: A Multicenter 23-Year Comparative Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Prognosis of PCI in AMI setting in the elderly population: Outcomes from the multicenter prospective e-ULTIMASTER registry.Clinical cardiology · 2022Article
- Outcomes of Nonagenarians with Acute Myocardial Infarction with or without Coronary Intervention.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
- Primary percutaneous coronary intervention in nonagenarians: is it worthwhile?BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2021Article
- Oral antiplatelet therapy in the elderly undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: an umbrella review.Journal of thoracic disease · 2020Review
- Comparison of Outcomes After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Elderly Patients, Including 10 628 Nonagenarians: Insights From a Japanese Nationwide Registry (J-PCI Registry).Journal of the American Heart Association · 2019Observational
- Predictive value of SYNTAX score II for clinical outcomes in octogenarian undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention.Journal of geriatric cardiology : JGC · 2016Article
- Impact of daily lifestyle on coronary heart disease.Experimental and therapeutic medicine · 2015Article
- Coronary revascularization in the elderly with stable angina.Journal of geriatric cardiology : JGC · 2015Review
- Prognosis of PCI in the Older Adult Population: Outcomes From the Multicenter Prospective e-ULTIMASTER Registry.Journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & InterventionsArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Percutaneous coronary intervention is a mainstay in the management of symptomatic or high-risk coronary artery disease. The bulk of clinical evidence and experience underlying this fact relies, however, on relatively young patients. Indeed, few data of very limited quality are available which adequately define the risk-benefit and cost-benefit profile of coronary angioplasty and stenting in very old subjects, such as those of 90 years of age or older (i.e., nonagenarians). The aim of this review is to provide a concise, yet practical, synthesis of the available evidence on percutaneous coronary revascularization in the very elderly. The main arguments elaborated upon are to what extent we can extrapolate findings from studies including younger patients to nonagenarians, whether we should provide higher priority to prognosis or quality of life in such patients, and whether we can afford to allocate vast resources to care for such subjects in an era of financial constraints. Our review of 18 studies and 1082 patients suggest that percutaneous coronary intervention is feasible and associated with acceptable short- and long-term results in this population, which is nonetheless fraught with a high mortality risk irrespective of the revascularization procedure. Accordingly, the pros and cons of percutaneous coronary intervention should be carefully weighed when considering this treatment in nonagenarians.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.