ArticleCardiovascular diagnosis and therapy2020
Revascularization versus drug therapy for coronary artery disease in patients aged over 80 years: a real-world study.
Article in Cardiovascular diagnosis and therapy, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Revascularization vs. Conservative Medical Treatment in Patients With Chronic Kidney Disease and Coronary Artery Disease: A Meta-Analysis.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2021Pooled it
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRevascularization for the treatment of coronary artery disease (CAD) is advancing rapidly and is used increasingly in old patients. This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of revascularization with drug therapy in CAD patients aged over 80 years at a real-world clinical setting.
methodsA total of 501 CAD patients aged over 80 years were consecutively enrolled from January 2011 to January 2016 in Anzhen Hospital (Beijing, China), Capital Medical University. The patients were treated with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) (n=283), coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) (n=106), or drug therapy (n=112). All-cause mortality, cardiovascular-related mortality, readmission rate, and Seattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ) score were compared between the three treatment methods.
resultsA total of 411 patients (82.04%) were followed with a median duration of 25 months. All-cause mortality and cardiovascular-related mortality in the drug therapy group were significantly higher than the PCI and CABG groups (both P<0.05). Readmission rate for cardiovascular events in the CABG group was significantly lower than the PCI and drug therapy groups (both P<0.05). Scores of physical limitation, angina frequency, treatment satisfaction, and disease perception of the SAQ in the PCI and CABG groups were significantly higher than the drug therapy group (both P<0.05). Scores of angina stability did not differ significant between the three groups (P=0.127).
conclusionsRevascularization is superior to drug therapy in efficacy and safety in the treatment of oldest-old patients with CAD.
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.