American journal of surgery · 2016
Implantable cardioverter defibrillators and permanent pacemakers: prevalence and patient outcomes after trauma.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Altieri Maria S, Almasry Ibrahim, Jones Tyler, McPhee Christa, McCormack Jane E, Huang Emily C, Eckardt Patricia, Shapiro Marc J, Eckardt Sarah, Vosswinkel James A, Jawa Randeep S
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: The prevalence and outcomes of older trauma patients with implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) or permanent pacemakers (PPMs) is unknown.
METHODS: The trauma registry at a regional trauma center was reviewed for blunt trauma patients, aged ≥ 60 years, admitted between 2007 and 2014. Medical records of cardiac devices patients were reviewed.
RESULTS: Of 4,193 admissions, there were 146 ICD, 233 PPM, and 3,814 no device patients; median Injury Severity Score was 9. Most cardiac device patients had substantial underlying heart disease. Patients with ICDs (13.0%) and PPMs (8.6%) had higher mortality rates than no device patients (5.6%, P = .0002). Among cardiac device patients who died, the device was functioning properly in all that were interrogated; the most common cause of death was intracranial hemorrhage. On propensity score analysis, cardiac devices were not independent predictors of mortality but rather surrogate variables associated with other predictors of mortality.
CONCLUSIONS: Approximately 9.0% of admitted older patients had cardiac devices. Their presence identified patients who had higher mortality rates, likely because of their underlying comorbidities, including cardiac dysfunction.
METHODS: The trauma registry at a regional trauma center was reviewed for blunt trauma patients, aged ≥ 60 years, admitted between 2007 and 2014. Medical records of cardiac devices patients were reviewed.
RESULTS: Of 4,193 admissions, there were 146 ICD, 233 PPM, and 3,814 no device patients; median Injury Severity Score was 9. Most cardiac device patients had substantial underlying heart disease. Patients with ICDs (13.0%) and PPMs (8.6%) had higher mortality rates than no device patients (5.6%, P = .0002). Among cardiac device patients who died, the device was functioning properly in all that were interrogated; the most common cause of death was intracranial hemorrhage. On propensity score analysis, cardiac devices were not independent predictors of mortality but rather surrogate variables associated with other predictors of mortality.
CONCLUSIONS: Approximately 9.0% of admitted older patients had cardiac devices. Their presence identified patients who had higher mortality rates, likely because of their underlying comorbidities, including cardiac dysfunction.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
Age FactorsAgedAged, 80 and overCause of DeathDefibrillators, ImplantableFemaleHeart DiseasesHospital MortalityHumansInjury Severity ScoreLogistic ModelsMaleMiddle AgedMultivariate AnalysisPacemaker, ArtificialPrevalencePropensity ScoreRegistriesRisk AssessmentSurvival AnalysisTrauma CentersWounds, Nonpenetrating