...
首页> 外文期刊>Circulation. Cardiovascular quality and outcomes >Survival Benefit of the Primary Prevention Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator among Older Patients: Does Age Matter? An Analysis of Pooled Data from 5 Clinical Trials
【24h】

Survival Benefit of the Primary Prevention Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator among Older Patients: Does Age Matter? An Analysis of Pooled Data from 5 Clinical Trials

机译:老年患者一级预防性植入式心脏复律除颤器的生存获益:年龄重要吗?来自5个临床试验的汇总数据分析

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

The impact of patient age on the risks of death or rehospitalization after primary prevention implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) placement is uncertain. Methods and Results-Data from 5 major ICD trials were merged: the Multicenter Automatic Defibrillator Implantation Trial I (MADIT-I), the Multicenter UnSustained Tachycardia Trial (MUSTT), the Multicenter Automatic Defibrillator Implantation Trial II (MADIT-II), the Defibrillators in Nonischemic Cardiomyopathy Treatment Evaluation Trial (DEFINITE), and the Sudden Cardiac Death in Heart Failure Trial (SCD-HeFT). Median age at enrollment was 62 (interquartile range 53-70) years. Compared with their younger counterparts, older patients had a greater burden of comorbid illness. In unadjusted exploratory analyses, ICD recipients were less likely to die than nonrecipients in all age groups: among patients aged <55 years: hazard ratio 0.48, 95% posterior credible interval 0.33 to 0.69; among patients aged 55 to 64 years: hazard ratio 0.69, 95% posterior credible interval 0.53 to 0.90; among patients aged 65 to 74 years: hazard ratio 0.67, 95% posterior credible interval, 0.53 to 0.85; and among patients aged ≥75 years: hazard ratio 0.54, 95% posterior credible interval 0.37 to 0.78. Sample sizes were limited among patients aged ≥75 years. In adjusted Bayesian-Weibull modeling, point estimates indicate ICD efficacy persists but is attenuated with increasing age. There was evidence of an interaction between age and ICD treatment on survival (two-sided posterior tail probability of no interaction <0.01). Using an adjusted Bayesian logistic regression model, there was no evidence of an interaction between age and ICD treatment on rehospitalization (two-sided posterior tail probability of no interaction 0.44). Conclusions-In this analysis, the survival benefit of the ICD exists but is attenuated with increasing age. The latter finding may be because of the higher burden of comorbid illness, competing causes of death, or limited sample size of older patients. There was no evidence that age modifies the association between ICD treatment and rehospitalization.
机译:初步预防植入式心脏复律除颤器(ICD)放置后患者年龄对死亡或再次住院风险的影响尚不确定。方法和结果-合并了来自5个主要ICD试验的数据:多中心自动除颤器植入试验I(MADIT-I),多中心不持续性心动过速试验(MUSTT),多中心自动除颤器植入试验II(MADIT-II),除颤器非缺血性心肌病治疗评估试验(DEFINITE)和心衰猝死(SCD-HeFT)。入学年龄中位数为62岁(四分位数范围为53-70)。与年轻患者相比,老年患者的合并症负担更大。在未经调整的探索性分析中,ICD接受者在所有年龄组中的死亡几率均比非接受者低:在55岁以下的患者中,危险比为0.48,95%的后可信区间为0.33至0.69;在55岁至64岁的患者中:危险比为0.69,后可信区间的95%为0.53至0.90; 65至74岁患者中:危险比0.67,后可信区间95%,0.53至0.85;在≥75岁的患者中:危险比0.54,后可信区间95%为0.37至0.78。 ≥75岁的患者的样本量有限。在调整的贝叶斯-魏布尔模型中,点估计值表明ICD疗效持续存在,但随着年龄的增长而减弱。有证据表明年龄和ICD治疗之间存在相互作用(生存期,无反应的两侧后尾概率<0.01)。使用调整后的贝叶斯逻辑回归模型,没有证据表明年龄和ICD治疗在住院治疗之间有相互作用(没有后方相互作用的两侧后尾概率为0.44)。结论-在此分析中,ICD的生存获益存在,但随着年龄的增长而减弱。后一种发现可能是由于合并症的负担增加,死亡的竞争原因或老年患者的样本量有限。没有证据表明年龄改变了ICD治疗和再次住院之间的联系。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号