Outcomes Following Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator Insertion in Patients 80 Years of Age or Older: A Statewide Population Cohort Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Patients ≥ 80 years of age are underrepresented in major implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) trials, and real-world data are lacking. In this study, we sought to assess ICD utilisation, outcomes, and their predictors, in an unselected statewide population including patients ≥ 80 years old. METHODS: We extracted details of ICDs implanted from 2009 to 2018 in New South Wales (NSW), Australia from the Centre for Health Record Linkage administrative data sets. Analysis was stratified into age groups of < 60 years, 60-79 years, and ≥ 80 years. RESULTS: A total of 9304 patients (mean age 66.1 ± 13.1 years; 12.1% ≥ 80 years) had de novo ICD placement at an average rate of 1163 ± 122 patients per annum, with more implants in men in all age groups. After adjusting for NSW population size by sex, age group, and calendar year, mean implantation rates were 5.5 ± 0.6, 63.2 ± 8.6, and 52.7 ± 10.8 per 100,000 persons per annum in patients aged < 60 years, 60-79 years, and ≥ 80 years, respectively. In-hospital mortality was 0.4% and did not differ among age groups. However, 1-year mortality was 2.1%, 5.9%, and 10.7%, in those < 60 years, 60-79 years, and ≥ 80 years of age, respectively (P < 0.001), with hazard ratios for those aged ≥ 80 years of 4.3 (95% confidence interval [CI] 3.1-6.0) and those aged 60-79 years of 2.6 (95% CI 1.9-3.5) relative to those aged < 60 years (both P < 0.001) after adjusting for ICD indications, sex, implantation year, referral source, and comorbidities. In those aged ≥ 80 years, age > 83 years, congestive cardiac failure, chronic renal failure, neurodegenerative disease, and a higher Charlson comorbidity index score were each independent predictors of 1-year mortality. CONCLUSIONS: ICD use in patients aged ≥ 80 years and 60-79 years was 10-fold that in patients aged < 60 years, and perioperative outcomes were good in all ages, but there was substantially increased 1-year mortality in those aged ≥ 80 years. Careful selection based on age and comorbidity may further reduce 1-year mortality in patients ≥ 80 years old receiving ICDs.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".