ArticleBMC geriatrics2026
NSTEMI in the oldest-old: prognosis and impact of invasive management in patients ≥ 85 years.
Article in BMC geriatrics, 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
18 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionAs the population ages, non–ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) in the oldest-old poses unique management challenges, yet this group remains underrepresented in clinical trials. Hence, the present study sought to evaluate clinical outcomes and the effectiveness of coronary intervention in patients aged ≥ 85 years with NSTEMI admitted to the intensive coronary care unit (ICCU) of a tertiary center within an unselected, contemporary cohort.
methodsAll consecutive patients aged ≥ 60 years admitted to the ICCU with a diagnosis of NSTEMI between July 2019 and June 2024 were included. Patients were stratified into two groups according to age (60–84 years and ≥ 85 years). The primary outcome was all-cause mortality at 45 days, 6 months, and long-term follow-up. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards models were used to identify independent predictors of mortality. To address potential confounding by indication, propensity scores for receiving percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) were estimated, and inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was applied within each age group.
resultsA total of 967 patients were enrolled, with a mean age of 73.6 ± 8.9 years; 137 (14%) were aged ≥ 85 years. Invasive management, including percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), was more common in the younger cohort (75.1% vs. 63.5%, p < 0.05), while the rates of diagnostic angiography without intervention were similar between groups (18.3% vs. 19.2%, p = 0.85). Mortality was significantly higher among older patients at all time points: 45 days (14.6% vs. 5.9%, p < 0.001), 6 months (19.7% vs. 8.5%, p < 0.001), and beyond 6 months (42.3% vs. 17.9%, p < 0.001). In multivariable Cox analysis, revascularization was independently associated with lower mortality (HR 0.565; 95% CI 0.38–0.84; p = 0.002). Propensity score–adjusted analyses yielded consistent results, demonstrating lower mortality among patients undergoing revascularization, particularly in the 60–84 year group, with similar directional trends observed in patients aged ≥ 85 years.
conclusionsPatients ≥ 85 years with NSTEMI had higher mortality than younger patients. In this real-world cohort, invasive management was associated with improved survival, including among carefully selected very elderly patients. These findings support an individualized approach to treatment selection rather than exclusion based only on chronological age.
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.