ArticleNetherlands heart journal : monthly journal of the Netherlands Society of Cardiology and the Netherlands Heart Foundation2015
Long-term ischaemic and bleeding outcomes after primary percutaneous coronary intervention for ST-elevation myocardial infarction in the elderly.
Article in Netherlands heart journal : monthly journal of the Netherlands Society of Cardiology and the Netherlands Heart Foundation, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Prevalence and associated factors of mortality after percutaneous coronary intervention for adult patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of research in medical sciences : the official journal of Isfahan University of Medical Sciences · 2023Review
- Staged revascularization vs. culprit-only percutaneous coronary intervention for multivessel disease in elderly patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2022Article
- Acute myocardial infarction in the elderly.Netherlands heart journal : monthly journal of the Netherlands Society of Cardiology and the Netherlands Heart Foundation · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe population is ageing rapidly and the proportion of patients aged ≥ 80 years undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is rising, but clinical trials have primarily been performed in younger patients.
methodsPatients undergoing primary PCI between 2003 and 2008 were subdivided into 3 groups: < 60, 60-79, and ≥ 80 years. Endpoints at 3-year follow-up included all-cause mortality, recurrent myocardial infarction (reMI), stent thrombosis, target lesion revascularisation (TLR), bleeding (BARC bleeding ≥ 3), stroke, and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE, a composite of cardiac mortality, reMI, stroke and TLR).
results2002 patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) were included, 885 (44.2 %) aged < 60, 921 (46.0 %) 60-79, and 196 (9.7 %) ≥ 80 years. Comorbidities such as diabetes mellitus, prior stroke, malignant disease, anaemia, and chronic kidney disease were more prevalent in patients ≥ 80 years. The incidence of both ischaemic and bleeding events strongly increased with age. Age ≥ 80 years was an independent predictor of mortality (HR 2.56, 95 % CI1.69-3.87, p < 0.001), a borderline non-significant predictor of overall bleeding (HR 1.38, 95 %CI 0.95-2.00, p = 0.088), and a significant predictor of non-access site bleeding (HR 2.26, 95 %CI 1.46-3.51, p < 0.001).
conclusionPatients ≥ 80 years experienced high rates of ischaemic and bleeding complications; especially in this high-risk patient group individualised therapy is needed to optimise clinical outcomes.
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.