Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Mais filtros










Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes ; 8(2): 179-86, 2015 Mar.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25669833

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: 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.


Assuntos
Cardiomiopatias/terapia , Morte Súbita Cardíaca/prevenção & controle , Desfibriladores Implantáveis , Cardioversão Elétrica/instrumentação , Prevenção Primária/métodos , Fatores Etários , Idoso , Teorema de Bayes , Cardiomiopatias/diagnóstico , Cardiomiopatias/mortalidade , Cardiomiopatias/fisiopatologia , Distribuição de Qui-Quadrado , Ensaios Clínicos como Assunto , Comorbidade , Morte Súbita Cardíaca/etiologia , Cardioversão Elétrica/efeitos adversos , Cardioversão Elétrica/mortalidade , Feminino , Humanos , Estimativa de Kaplan-Meier , Modelos Lineares , Modelos Logísticos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Readmissão do Paciente , Modelos de Riscos Proporcionais , Estudos Retrospectivos , Medição de Risco , Fatores de Risco , Fatores de Tempo , Resultado do Tratamento
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA
...