ArticleNetherlands heart journal : monthly journal of the Netherlands Society of Cardiology and the Netherlands Heart Foundation2022
Final benefit of primary percutaneous coronary intervention for ST-elevation myocardial infarction in older patients: long-term results of a randomised trial.
Article in Netherlands heart journal : monthly journal of the Netherlands Society of Cardiology and the Netherlands Heart Foundation, 2022. 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Management of Acute Coronary Syndrome in Elderly Patients: A Narrative Review through Decisional Crossroads.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- Bivalirudin vs heparin in cardiac-cerebral ischemic and bleeding events among Chinese STEMI patients during percutaneous coronary intervention: a retrospective cohort study.Brazilian journal of medical and biological research = Revista brasileira de pesquisas medicas e biologica · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAlthough the short-term benefit of primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in elderly patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) has been demonstrated, the final long-term survival benefit is as yet unknown.
aimTo assess the final survival benefit of primary PCI as compared to thrombolytic therapy in patients over 75 years of age.
methodsPatients > 75 years with STEMI were randomised to either primary PCI or thrombolysis. Long-term data on survival were available for all patients.
resultsA total of 46 patients were randomised to primary PCI, 41 to thrombolysis. There were no significant differences in baseline variables. After a maximum of 20 years' follow-up, all patients had passed away. The patients randomised to thrombolysis died after a mean follow-up duration of 5.2 years (SD 4.9) compared to 6.7 years (SD 4.8) in patients randomised to primary PCI (p = 0.15). Thus, the mean final survival benefit of primary PCI was 1.5 years.
conclusionThe final survival benefit of primary PCI as compared to thrombolysis in elderly patients with STEMI is 1.5 years and their life expectancy increases by 28.8%.
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.