ArticleCardiology research2017
In-Hospital Clinical Outcomes and Procedural Complications of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Elderly Patients.
Article in Cardiology research, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Normalizing the dementia status in cardiovascular diseases: a perspective.Journal of geriatric cardiology : JGC · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAs population growth leads to an increase in the number of the elderly with coronary artery disease, an evaluation of the clinical outcomes of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in the elderly patients seems to be essential.
methodsA prospective, observational cohort study was performed on 468 patients in two groups of elderly and non-elderly patients (mean age: 60.01 ± 10.84 years; ≥ 70 years, 20.1%; men, 62%) who underwent PCI, to evaluate the procedural success and in-hospital major and minor adverse cardiovascular events in the elderly patients.
resultsThe procedural success rate was significantly lower (95.7% vs. 99.5%, P = 0.017) and the rates of in-hospital complications were significantly higher (10.6% vs. 0.8%, P < 0.0001) in elderly (+70) than in non-elderly patients. On the basis of a multivariate analysis, being elderly was not an independent predictor of procedural failure, but increased the chance of in-hospital complications to 8% higher (odds ratio: 0.08; 95% confidence interval: 0.01 - 0.39; P = 0.002).
conclusionRegardless of the difference in the procedural success and in-hospital complication rates between our two study groups, aging is not an important predictor of them. Furthermore, PCI should not be refused in elderly patients if indicated.
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.