What is the clinical evidence from this study?

Study design: Cohort. Population: Acute myocardial infarction (n=3814). Intervention: Age > 65 years vs. Age ≤ 65 years. Primary outcome: In-hospital mortality (p=<0.001).

April 25, 2012BMC Cardiovascular DisordersOpen Access

Age – related treatment strategy and long-term outcome in acute myocardial infarction patients in the PCI era

Q: What are the key findings of this study?

Older patients (>65 years) with acute myocardial infarction had significantly higher in-hospital mortality compared to younger patients (8.5% vs. 2.6%, p < 0.001) and lower rates of PCI.

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

Key result

Older patients (>65 years) with acute myocardial infarction had significantly higher in-hospital mortality compared to younger patients (8.5% vs. 2.6%, p < 0.001) and lower rates of PCI.

Why the study?

Does older age (>65 years) affect treatment strategies, procedural success, and long-term outcomes in patients with acute myocardial infarction?

Population

3,814 consecutive "all-comer" patients with acute myocardial infarction admitted to 3 tertiary…

Comparison

Age > 65 years (older population) vs Age ≤ 65 years (younger population)

Design

Cohort

Follow-up

up to 5 years

Authors

PKPetr Kala JKJan Kaňovský RRRichard Rokyta

Discussion

Member takes

Overview

Age >65 years links to higher AMI mortality and lower PCI use; leaves open whether targeted strategies improve outcomes.

Study Design

Type

Cohort (n=3,814)

Multicenter

Yes

Structured PICO

Does older age (>65 years) affect treatment strategies, procedural success, and long-term outcomes in patients with acute myocardial infarction?

Population

3,814 consecutive adult patients with acute myocardial infarction, divided by age (≤65 vs >65 years), followed for in-hospital and long-term outcomes up to 5 years.

Exposure

Age > 65 years (older population)

Comparator

Age ≤ 65 years (younger population)

Outcome

Coronary angiography and PCI performed during index hospitalization, final TIMI flow after PCI, change in TIMI flow during PCI, in-hospital mortality, and long-term mortality (up to 5 years).hard clinical

Main Result

Absolute Event Rate: 8.5% vs 2.6%

p-value: p=<0.001

Older age (>65 years) in acute myocardial infarction patients is associated with lower rates of invasive management, lower procedural success, and worse short- and long-term survival, highlighting age as a dominant discriminating risk factor.

Limitations

Retrospective registry design
Angiographic data were not assessed by an independent lab or in a blinded manner
Only a limited number of coronary artery disease risk factors were followed
Only univariate analysis was used to assess predictors of long-term survival between the two cohorts
Angiographic data not assessed by an independent lab or in a blinded manner
Only univariate analysis was used to assess predictors of long-term survival

Cite This Study

Kala et al. (2012) conducted a cohort in Acute myocardial infarction (n=3,814). Age > 65 years vs. Age ≤ 65 years was evaluated on In-hospital mortality (p=<0.001). Older patients (>65 years) with acute myocardial infarction had significantly higher in-hospital mortality compared to younger patients (8.5% vs. 2.6%, p < 0.001) and lower rates of PCI.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a9465848a4c78aef331a63c https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2261-12-31

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

April 25, 2012BMC Cardiovascular DisordersOpen Access

Age – related treatment strategy and long-term outcome in acute myocardial infarction patients in the PCI era

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

Key result

Older patients (>65 years) with acute myocardial infarction had significantly higher in-hospital mortality compared to younger patients (8.5% vs. 2.6%, p < 0.001) and lower rates of PCI.

Why the study?

Does older age (>65 years) affect treatment strategies, procedural success, and long-term outcomes in patients with acute myocardial infarction?

Population

3,814 consecutive "all-comer" patients with acute myocardial infarction admitted to 3 tertiary…

Comparison

Age > 65 years (older population) vs Age ≤ 65 years (younger population)

Design

Cohort

Follow-up

up to 5 years

Authors

PKPetr Kala JKJan Kaňovský RRRichard Rokyta

Discussion

Member takes

Overview

Age >65 years links to higher AMI mortality and lower PCI use; leaves open whether targeted strategies improve outcomes.

Study Design

Type

Cohort (n=3,814)

Multicenter

Yes

Structured PICO

Does older age (>65 years) affect treatment strategies, procedural success, and long-term outcomes in patients with acute myocardial infarction?

Population

3,814 consecutive adult patients with acute myocardial infarction, divided by age (≤65 vs >65 years), followed for in-hospital and long-term outcomes up to 5 years.

Exposure

Age > 65 years (older population)

Comparator

Age ≤ 65 years (younger population)

Outcome

Main Result

Absolute Event Rate: 8.5% vs 2.6%

p-value: p=<0.001

Limitations

Retrospective registry design
Angiographic data were not assessed by an independent lab or in a blinded manner
Only a limited number of coronary artery disease risk factors were followed
Only univariate analysis was used to assess predictors of long-term survival between the two cohorts
Angiographic data not assessed by an independent lab or in a blinded manner
Only univariate analysis was used to assess predictors of long-term survival

Cite This Study

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a9465848a4c78aef331a63c https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2261-12-31

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark