Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28868073›Full record

ReviewJournal of geriatric cardiology : JGC2017

Antithrombotic treatment tailoring and risk score evaluation in elderly patients diagnosed with an acute coronary syndrome.

Alexandru Nicolae Mischie, Catalina Liliana Andrei, Crina Sinescu, Gani Bajraktari, Eugen Ivan, Georgios Nikolaos Chatziathanasiou, Michele Schiariti

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of geriatric cardiology : JGC, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 18% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Contemporary Revascularization Dilemmas in Older Adults.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2020
    Review
  5. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Alexandru Nicolae MischieInvasive Cardiology Unit, Centre Hospitalier de Montluçon, Montluçon, France.
Catalina Liliana AndreiCarol Davila University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Bucharest, Romania.
Crina SinescuCarol Davila University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Bucharest, Romania.
Gani BajraktariClinic of Cardiology, University Clinical Centre of Kosova, Prishtina, Republic of Kosovo.
Eugen IvanComanche Memorial Hospital, Lawton, USA.
Georgios Nikolaos ChatziathanasiouCardiology Clinic, Preveza, Greece.
Michele SchiaritiDepartment of Cardiovascular Sciences, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy.
Carol Davila University of Medicine and Pharmacy · ROSapienza University of Rome · ITUniversity Clinical Center of Kosovo · XK

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Age is an important prognostic factor in the outcome of acute coronary syndromes (ACS). A substantial percentage of patients who experience ACS is more than 75 years old, and they represent the fastest-growing segment of the population treated in this setting. These patients present different patterns of responses to pharmacotherapy, namely, a higher ischemic and bleeding risk than do patients under 75 years of age. Our aim was to identify whether the currently available ACS ischemic and bleeding risk scores, which has been validated for the general population, may also apply to the elderly population. The second aim was to determine whether the elderly benefit more from a specific pharmacological regimen, keeping in mind the numerous molecules of antiplatelet and antithrombotic drugs, all validated in the general population. We concluded that the GRACE (Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events) risk score has been extensively validated in the elderly. However, the CRUSADE (Can Rapid risk stratification of Unstable angina patients Suppress ADverse outcomes with Early implementation of the ACC/AHA Guidelines) bleeding score has a moderate correlation with outcomes in the elderly. Until now, there have not been head-to-head scores that quantify the ischemic versus hemorrhagic risk or scores that use the same end point and timeline (e.g., ischemic death rate versus bleeding death rate at one month). We also recommend that the frailty score be considered or integrated into the current existing scores to better quantify the overall patient risk. With regard to medical treatment, based on the subgroup analysis, we identified the drugs that have the least adverse effects in the elderly while maintaining optimal efficacy.

Indexed as

Acute coronary syndromeAntithrombotic treatmentElderly patientsRisk score evaluation

Identifiers

PMID28868073
PMCPMC5545187
OpenAlexW2739671243

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.