ArticleReviews in cardiovascular medicine2026
Prognostic Value of Estimated Glomerular Filtration Rate in Older Patients With Acute Coronary Syndrome.
Article in Reviews in cardiovascular medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Background: While the association between estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) and cardiovascular disease has been well established in younger populations, the prognostic significance of this marker in older individuals remains less well defined. Thus, this study aimed to evaluate the predictive value of eGFR in patients aged 80 years or older with acute coronary syndrome (ACS). Methods: We enrolled 551 patients aged ≥80 years hospitalized for ACS, who had the eGFR calculated at admission. The participants were further stratified into three groups by eGFR levels: Low-eGFR group (L-eGFR, eGFR < the 20th percentile), Medium-eGFR group (M-eGFR, the 20th percentile ≤ eGFR < the 80th percentile), and High-eGFR group (H-eGFR, eGFR ≥ the 80th percentile). Major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) were recorded during the follow-up period. Results: During a median 63-month follow-up, the L-eGFR group exhibited a higher cumulative incidence of MACEs, while the H-eGFR group showed a relatively improved prognosis compared with the M-eGFR group. A multivariate Cox regression analysis revealed that reduced eGFR levels remained independently predictive for long-term MACEs. Compared with the M-eGFR group, the L-eGFR group showed a higher risk (hazard ratio (HR) 1.542, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.104-2.155). The H-eGFR group exhibited a protective effect (HR 0.643, 95% CI: 0.438-0.943). Conclusions: Reduced eGFR levels were independent predictors for long-term MACEs in older ACS patients. The H-eGFR group had an improved prognosis, suggesting that further exploration of the underlying mechanism linking renal function and prognosis is warranted.
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.