Key result
PCI linked to ~68% lower in-hospital mortality in elderly patients with AMI.
Why the study?
The status of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and the reasons for not receiving PCI in elderly patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) needed investigation.
Does percutaneous coronary intervention reduce in-hospital mortality in elderly patients (≥80 years) with acute myocardial infarction?
Cohort (n=387)
Does percutaneous coronary intervention reduce in-hospital mortality in elderly patients (≥80 years) with acute myocardial infarction?
PCI is associated with significantly reduced in-hospital mortality in AMI patients aged ≥80 years, though utilization remains low due to comorbidities and delayed presentation.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Supports selective PCI use in elderly AMI patients; leaves open causality and generalizability pending randomized trials.
To investigate the status of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in elderly patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) and analyze the reasons for not receiving PCI.A cohort of 387 consecutive hospitalized AMI patients aged ≥80 years were recruited from 2005 to 2014. Their clinical data were collected and analyzed.Among 387 elderly patients with AMI (190 men and 197 women, mean age 84.1 ± 3.9 years), there were 171 patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and 216 patients with non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI). The emergency and elective PCI treatment rate was 40.6% and 12.1%, respectively, in patients with STEMI; and 1% and 18%, respectively, in patients with NSTEMI. PCI treatment rate of elderly AMI patients enrolled after 2009 showed no significant difference compared to that before 2009 (P > .05). The in-hospital mortality decreased significantly in PCI treatment group. After adjustment for age, sex, and other factors, PCI treatment was identified as the independent protective factors for in-hospital mortality (odds ratio = 0.323, 95% confidence interval 0.147-0.710, P = .005). The main influence factors for not receiving PCI treatment were hemorrhage, severe renal dysfunction, infection, or severe anemia-associated complications, whereas delayed treatment was the important reason for patients not undergoing emergency PCI.PCI treatment is the independent protective factor for in-hospital mortality of elderly patients with AMI. Due to various complications, PCI treatment rate is still low in elderly patients with AMI and has not been improved recently. Paying attention to performing PCI treatment for elderly patients with AMI has positive significance.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Chen et al. (2019) conducted a cohort in Acute myocardial infarction (AMI) (n=387). Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) vs. Not receiving PCI was evaluated on In-hospital mortality (OR 0.323, 95% CI 0.147-0.710, p=.005). Percutaneous coronary intervention was an independent protective factor for in-hospital mortality in elderly patients with acute myocardial infarction.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: