ArticleHealth science reports2023
Predictors of mortality and clinical outcomes following implantable cardioverter-defibrillator therapy in elderly patients: A retrospective single-center cohort study.
Article in Health science reports, 2023. 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.
- Long-term outcomes of cardiac resynchronization therapy and implantable cardioverter defibrillators in elderly patients with heart failure.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2025Article
- A Look at Primary and Secondary Prevention in the Elderly: The Two Sides of the Same Coin.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- Predictors of mortality and clinical outcomes following implantable cardioverter-defibrillator therapy in elderly patients: A retrospective single-center cohort study.Health science reports · 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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and aims: Implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) are frequently used to prevent sudden cardiac death in patients with high-risk arrhythmias. However, the use of ICD therapy in elderly patients beyond the predicted age of life expectancy is still controversial. We aimed to evaluate the predictors of mortality and clinical outcomes following ICD implantation in elderly patients. Methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis of 145 elderly patients aged 72 years and older who received ICD implantation between January 2010 and August 2015. We collected and analyzed baseline data, including clinical, demographic, and medical history, the reason for ICD therapy, procedural data, and echocardiography results. Follow-up data included the development of complications and mortality. The predictors of mortality were identified using the univariate and multivariable Cox regression models. Results: During the median follow-up duration of 30.5 [18.0-48.0] months, 141 cases completed follow-up (mean age = 76.0 ± 3.7 years). Forty-four patients experienced at least one episode of ICD therapy. Inappropriate shock, recurrent shock, and device-related infection were the most frequent complications observed in our study. Of the 145 patients, 42 died during the follow-up period, with an average survival time of 22.4 months after ICD implantation. Among these patients, 11 received ICD for primary prevention, and 31 received it for secondary prevention. Cardiovascular problems were the leading cause of death. We found that a low baseline ejection fraction (EF) was an independent predictor of mortality (hazard ratio = 0.93, 95% confidence interval: 0.90-0.98; Conclusion: Our study suggests that ICD therapy is a valuable treatment option for elderly patients beyond their predicted age of life expectancy. The study highlights the importance of baseline EF as a significant predictor of mortality in these patients.
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.