CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 53Coronary Interventions and DiagnosticsFrailty in Older AdultsCardiac Valve Diseases and Treatments

Chronological vs Biological Age in Interventional Cardiology

Open access
Damluji, Abdulla A., Nanna, Michael G., Rymer, Jennifer, Kochar, Ajar, Lowenstern, Angela, Baron, Suzanne J., Narins, Craig R., Alkhouli, Mohamad·2024·JACC: Cardiovascular Interventions
DOI 10.1016/j.jcin.2024.01.284PMC PMC11097960
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Aging is the gradual decline in physical and physiological functioning leading to increased susceptibility to stressors and chronic illnesses, including cardiovascular disease. With an aging global population, in which 1 in 6 individuals will be older than 60 years by 2030, interventional cardiologists are increasingly involved in providing complex care for older individuals. Although procedural aspects remain their main clinical focus, interventionalists frequently encounter age-associated risks that influence eligibility for invasive care, decision making during the intervention, procedural adverse events, and long-term management decisions. The unprecedented growth in transcatheter interventions, especially for structural heart diseases at extremes of age, have pushed age-related risks and implications for cardiovascular care to the forefront. In this JACC state-of-the-art review, the authors provide a comprehensive overview of the aging process as it relates to cardiovascular interventions, with special emphasis on the difference between chronological and biological aging. The authors also address key considerations to improve health outcomes for older patients during and after their invasive cardiovascular care. The role of "gerotherapeutics" in interventional cardiology, technological innovation in measuring biological aging, and the integration of patient-centered outcomes in the older adult population are also discussed.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jcin.2024.01.284

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Aging and chronic diseases such as cardiovascular disease are two principal risk factors for the wasting continuum, and these conditions adversely influence outcomes for older adults with cardiovascular disease at greater risk of disability and mortality.

    “Aging and chronic diseases such as CVD are 2 principal risk factors for the wasting continuum, and these conditions adversely influence outcomes for older adults with CVD at greater risk of disability and mortality.91,92”

    From Malnutrition and Cachexia in Inpatients With Acute Cardiac Conditions: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association (2026) · cites this paper as [92]

    Split into 2 atoms — 1 confirmed, 1 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 155

  1. [1]1. Nanna MG, Sutton NR, Kochar A, et al. Assessment and management of older adults undergoing PCI, part 1. J Am Coll Cardiol Adv. 2023;2:100389.
  2. [2]2. Damluji AA, Forman DE, Wang TY, et al. Management of acute coronary syndrome in the older adult population: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association. Circulation. 2023;147: e32-e62. [PubMed: 36503287]
  3. [3]3. Forman DE, Kuchel GA, Newman JC, et al. Impact of geroscience on therapeutic strategies for older adults with cardiovascular disease: JACC scientific statement. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2023;82: 631-647. [PubMed: 37389519]
  4. [5]5. Damluji AA, Rymer JA, Nanna MG. The heterogeneity of old age: healthy aging in older adults undergoing TAVR. J Am Coll Cardiol Intv. 2023;16: 189-192.
  5. [6]6. Wu JW, Yaqub A, Ma Y, et al. Biological age in healthy elderly predicts aging-related diseases including dementia. Sci Rep. 2021;11:15929. [PubMed: 34354164]
  6. [7]7. Gorodeski EZ, Goyal P, Hummel SL, et al. Domain management approach to heart failure in the geriatric patient: present and future. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2018;71:1921-1936. [PubMed: 29699619]
  7. [8]8. Nanna MG, Sutton NR, Kochar A, et al. A geriatric approach to percutaneous coronary interventions in older adults, part II: a JACC: Advances expert panel. J Am Coll Cardiol Adv. 2023;2:100421.
  8. [9]9. Inouye SK, Studenski S, Tinetti ME, Kuchel GA. Geriatric syndromes: clinical, research, and policy implications of a core geriatric concept. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2007;55:780-791. [PubMed: 17493201]
  9. [10]10. Damluji AA, Chung SE, Xue QL, et al. Frailty and cardiovascular outcomes in the National Health and Aging Trends Study. Eur Heart J. 2021;42:3856-3865. [PubMed: 34324648]
  10. [11]11. Damluji AA, Huang J, Bandeen-Roche K, et al. Frailty among older adults with acute myocardial infarction and outcomes from percutaneous coronary interventions. J Am Heart Assoc. 2019;8: e013686. [PubMed: 31475601]
  11. [12]12. Singh M, Rihal CS, Lennon RJ, Spertus JA, Nair KS, Roger VL. Influence of frailty and health status on outcomes in patients with coronary disease undergoing percutaneous revascularization. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2011;4:496-502. [PubMed: 21878670]
  12. [13]13. Hermans MPJ, Eindhoven DC, van Winden LAM, et al. Frailty score for elderly patients is associated with short-term clinical outcomes in patients with ST-segment elevated myocardial infarction treated with primary percutaneous coronary intervention. Neth Heart J. 2019;27:127133. [PubMed: 30771094]
  13. [14]14. Castro-Dominguez YS, Wang Y, Minges KE, et al. Predicting in-hospital mortality in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2021;78:216-229. [PubMed: 33957239]
  14. [15]15. Solomon J, Moss E, Morin JF, et al. The Essential Frailty Toolset in older adults undergoing coronary artery bypass surgery. J Am Heart Assoc. 2021;10:e020219. [PubMed: 34315236]
  15. [16]16. Afilalo J, Lauck S, Kim DH, et al. Frailty in older adults undergoing aortic valve replacement: the FRAILTY-AVR study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2017;70: 689-700. [PubMed: 28693934]
  16. [17]17. Corrada MM, Brookmeyer R, Berlau D, Paganini-Hill A, Kawas CH. Prevalence of dementia after age 90: results from the 90+ study. Neurology. 2008;71:337-343. [PubMed: 18596243]
  17. [18]18. Auffret V, Campelo-Parada F, Regueiro A, et al. Serial changes in cognitive function following transcatheter aortic valve replacement. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2016;68:2129-2141. [PubMed: 27692728]
  18. [19]19. van Nieuwkerk AC, Delewi R, Wolters FJ, Muller M, Daemen M, Biessels GJ. Cognitive impairment in patients with cardiac disease: implications for clinical practice. Stroke. 2023;54: 2181-2191. [PubMed: 37272393]
  19. [20]20. Park DY, Hu JR, Alexander KP, Nanna MG. Readmission and adverse outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with dementia. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2023;71:1034-1046. [PubMed: 36409823]
  20. [21]21. Nasreddine ZS, Phillips NA, Bédirian V, et al. The Montreal Cognitive Assessment, MoCA: a brief screening tool for mild cognitive impairment. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2005;53:695-699. [PubMed: 15817019]
  21. [22]22. Borson S, Scanlan JM, Chen P, Ganguli M. The Mini-Cog as a screen for dementia: validation in a population-based sample. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2003;51:1451-1454. [PubMed: 14511167]
  22. [23]23. Dunlay SM, Chamberlain AM. Multimorbidity in older patients with cardiovascular disease. Curr Cardiovasc Risk Rep. 2016;10:3. [PubMed: 27274775]
  23. [24]24. Breen K, Finnegan L, Vuckovic K, Fink A, Rosamond W, DeVon HA. Multimorbidity in patients with acute coronary syndrome is associated with greater mortality, higher readmission rates, and increased length of stay: a systematic review. J Cardiovasc Nurs. 2020;35:E99-E110. [PubMed: 32925234]
  24. [25]25. Kanwar A, Roger VL, Lennon RJ, Gharacholou SM, Singh M. Poor quality of life in patients with and without frailty: co-prevalence and prognostic implications in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary interventions and cardiac catheterization. Eur Heart J Qual Care Clin Outcomes. 2021;7:591-600. [PubMed: 32821905]
  25. [26]26. Li R, Yan BP, Dong M, et al. Quality of life after percutaneous coronary intervention in the elderly with acute coronary syndrome. Int J Cardiol. 2012;155:90-96. [PubMed: 20965591]
  26. [27]27. Prieto L, Sacristán JA. Problems and solutions in calculating quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2003;1:80. [PubMed: 14687421]
  27. [28]28. Nanna MG, Peterson ED, Wu A, et al. Age, knowledge, preferences, and risk tolerance for invasive cardiac care. Am Heart J. 2020;219: 99-108. [PubMed: 31733450]
  28. [29]29. Hanna JM, Nanna MG. An age-old dilemma: defining the optimal revascularization approach in older adults. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2022;70:2205-2208. [PubMed: 35596677]
  29. [30]30. Spertus JA, Winder JA, Dewhurst TA, et al. Development and evaluation of the Seattle Angina Questionnaire: a new functional status measure for coronary artery disease. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1995;25:333-341. [PubMed: 7829785]
  30. [31]31. Spertus JA, Jones PG, Maron DJ, et al. Health-status outcomes with invasive or conservative care in coronary disease. N Engl J Med. 2020;382: 1408-1419. [PubMed: 32227753]
  31. [32]32. Fanaroff AC, Cyr D, Neely ML, et al. Days alive and out of hospital: exploring a patient-centered, pragmatic outcome in a clinical trial of patients with acute coronary syndromes. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2018;11:e004755. [PubMed: 30562068]
  32. [33]33. Kalra K, Moumneh MB, Nanna MG, Damluji AA. Beyond MACE: a multidimensional approach to outcomes in clinical trials for older adults with stable ischemic heart disease. Front Cardiovasc Med. 2023;10:1276370. [PubMed: 38045910]
  33. [34]34. Tinetti ME, Naik AD, Dindo L, et al. Association of patient priorities-aligned decision-making with patient outcomes and ambulatory health care burden among older adults with multiple chronic conditions: a nonrandomized clinical trial. JAMA Intern Med. 2019;179:1688-1697. [PubMed: 31589281]
  34. [35]35. Nanna MG, Wang SY, Damluji AA. Management of stable angina in the older adult population. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2023;16:e012438. [PubMed: 36916288]
  35. [36]36. Goyal P, Nanna MG. Stable coronary artery disease in the age of geriatric cardiology. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2023;81:1710-1713. [PubMed: 37100487]
  36. [37]37. Kumar S, McDaniel M, Samady H, Forouzandeh F. Contemporary revascularization dilemmas in older adults. J Am Heart Assoc. 2020;9:e014477. [PubMed: 31973608]
  37. [38]38. Tegn N, Abdelnoor M, Aaberge L, et al. Invasive versus conservative strategy in patients aged 80 years or older with non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction or unstable angina pectoris (After Eighty study): an open-label randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2016;387:1057-1065. [PubMed: 26794722]
  38. [39]39. Nguyen DD, Spertus JA, Alexander KP, et al. Health status and clinical outcomes in older adults with chronic coronary disease: the ISCHEMIA trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2023;81:1697-1709. [PubMed: 37100486]
  39. [40]40. Pfisterer M, Buser P, Osswald S, et al. Outcome of elderly patients with chronic symptomatic coronary artery disease with an invasive vs optimized medical treatment strategy: one-year results of the randomized TIME trial. JAMA. 2003;289:1117-1123. [PubMed: 12622581]
  40. [41]41. Sanchis J, Bueno H, Miñana G, et al. Effect of routine invasive vs conservative strategy in older adults with frailty and non-ST-segment elevation acute myocardial infarction: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA Intern Med. 2023;183:407-415. [PubMed: 36877502]
  41. [42]42. Rajkumar CA, Foley MJ, Ahmed-Jushuf F, et al. A placebo-controlled trial of percutaneous coronary intervention for stable angina. N Engl J Med. 2023;389(25):2319-2330. [PubMed: 38015442]
  42. [43]43. UK TAVI Trial Investigators, Toff WD, Hildick-Smith D, Kovac J, et al. Effect of transcatheter aortic valve implantation vs surgical aortic valve replacement on all-cause mortality in patients with aortic stenosis: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2022;327:1875-1887. [PubMed: 35579641]
  43. [44]44. Zack CJ, Al-Qahtani F, Kawsara A, Al-Hijji M, Amin AH, Alkhouli M. Comparative outcomes of surgical and transcatheter aortic valve replacement for aortic stenosis in nonagenarians. Am J Cardiol. 2017;119:893-899. [PubMed: 28061996]
  44. [45]45. Beatty AL, Bradley SM, Maynard C, McCabe JM. Referral to cardiac rehabilitation after percutaneous coronary intervention, coronary artery bypass surgery, and valve surgery. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2017;10:e003364. [PubMed: 28619725]
  45. [47]47. He N, Zhang Y, Zhang L, Zhang S, Ye H. Relationship between sarcopenia and cardiovascular diseases in the elderly: an overview. Front Cardiovasc Med. 2021;8:743710. [PubMed: 34957238]
  46. [48]48. Nanna MG, Hajduk AM, Krumholz HM, et al. Sex-based differences in presentation, treatment, and complications among older adults hospitalized for acute myocardial infarction. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2019;12:e005691. [PubMed: 31607145]
  47. [49]49. Damluji AA, Rodriguez G, Noel T, et al. Sarcopenia and health-related quality of life in older adults after transcatheter aortic valve replacement. Am Heart J. 2020;224:171-181. [PubMed: 32416332]
  48. [50]50. Practice guidelines for sedation and analgesia by non-anesthesiologists. Anesthesiology. 2002;96:1004-1017. [PubMed: 11964611]
  49. [51]51. Thygesen K, Alpert JS, Jaffe AS, et al. Fourth Universal definition of myocardial infarction (2018). Circulation. 2018;138:e618-e651. [PubMed: 30571511]
  50. [52]52. DeFilippis AP, Chapman AR, Mills NL, et al. Assessment and treatment of patients with type 2 myocardial infarction and acute nonischemic myocardial injury. Circulation. 2019;140:1661-1678. [PubMed: 31416350]
  51. [53]53. Rao SV, Ou FS, Wang TY, et al. Trends in the prevalence and outcomes of radial and femoral approaches to percutaneous coronary intervention: a report from the National Cardiovascular Data Registry. J Am Coll Cardiol Intv. 2008;1:379-386.
  52. [54]54. Ueki Y, Bar S, Losdat S, et al. Validation of the Academic Research Consortium for High Bleeding Risk (ARC-HBR) criteria in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention and comparison with contemporary bleeding risk scores. EuroIntervention. 2020;16:371-379. [PubMed: 32065586]
  53. [55]55. Damluji Abdulla A, Tehrani B, Sinha Shashank S, et al. Position statement on vascular access safety for percutaneous devices in AMI complicated by cardiogenic shock. J Am Coll Cardiol Intv. 2022;15:2003-2019.
  54. [56]56. Konishi H, Miyauchi K, Tsuboi S, et al. Impact of the HAS-BLED score on long-term outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention. Am J Cardiol. 2015;116:527-531. [PubMed: 26081068]
  55. [57]57. Rodriguez-Leor O, Fernandez-Nofrerias E, Carrillo X, et al. Results of primary percutaneous coronary intervention in patients ≥75 years treated by the transradial approach. Am J Cardiol. 2014;113:452-456. [PubMed: 24315363]
  56. [58]58. Chhatriwalla AK, Amin AP, Kennedy KF, et al. Association between bleeding events and in-hospital mortality after percutaneous coronary intervention. JAMA. 2013;309:1022-1029. [PubMed: 23483177]
  57. [59]59. Jolly SS, Yusuf S, Cairns J, et al. Radial versus femoral access for coronary angiography and intervention in patients with acute coronary syndromes (RIVAL): a randomised, parallel group, multicentre trial. Lancet. 2011;377:1409-1420. [PubMed: 21470671]
  58. [60]60. Achenbach S, Ropers D, Kallert L, et al. Transradial versus transfemoral approach for coronary angiography and intervention in patients above 75 years of age. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2008;72:629-635. [PubMed: 18798237]
  59. [61]61. Louvard Y, Benamer H, Garot P, et al. Comparison of transradial and transfemoral approaches for coronary angiography and angioplasty in octogenarians (the OCTOPLUS study). Am J Cardiol. 2004;94:1177-1180. [PubMed: 15518616]
  60. [62]62. Amin AP, Rao SV, Seto AH, et al. Transradial access for high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention: implications of the risk-treatment paradox. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2021;14:e009328. [PubMed: 34253050]
  61. [63]63. Yokoyama N, Takeshita S, Ochiai M, et al. Anatomic variations of the radial artery in patients undergoing transradial coronary intervention. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2000;49:357-362. [PubMed: 10751755]
  62. [64]64. Dodson JA, Geda M, Krumholz HM, et al. Design and rationale of the comprehensive evaluation of risk factors in older patients with AMI (SILVER-AMI) study. BMC Health Serv Res. 2014;14:506. [PubMed: 25370536]
  63. [65]65. Alexander KP, Newby LK, Cannon CP, et al. Acute coronary care in the elderly, part I: non-STsegment-elevation acute coronary syndromes: a scientific statement for healthcare professionals from the American Heart Association Council on Clinical Cardiology: in collaboration with the Society of Geriatric Cardiology. Circulation. 2007;115: 2549-2569. [PubMed: 17502590]
  64. [66]66. Dai X, Busby-Whitehead J, Alexander KP. Acute coronary syndrome in the older adults. J Geriatr Cardiol. 2016;13:101-108. [PubMed: 27168733]
  65. [67]67. Avezum A, Makdisse M, Spencer F, et al. Impact of age on management and outcome of acute coronary syndrome: observations from the Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events (GRACE). Am Heart J. 2005;149:67-73. [PubMed: 15660036]
  66. [68]68. Lee PY, Alexander KP, Hammill BG, Pasquali SK, Peterson ED. Representation of elderly persons and women in published randomized trials of acute coronary syndromes. JAMA. 2001;286:708713. [PubMed: 11495621]
  67. [69]69. Damluji AA, Resar JR, Gerstenblith G, Gross AL, Forman DE, Moscucci M. Temporal trends of percutaneous coronary interventions in older adults with acute myocardial infarction. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2019;12:e007812. [PubMed: 31010297]
  68. [70]70. Shanmugam VB, Harper R, Meredith I, Malaiapan Y, Psaltis PJ. An overview of PCI in the very elderly. J Geriatr Cardiol. 2015;12:174-184. [PubMed: 25870621]
  69. [71]71. Alexander KP, Newby LK, Armstrong PW, et al. Acute coronary care in the elderly, part II: ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction: a scientific statement for healthcare professionals from the American Heart Association Council on Clinical Cardiology: in collaboration with the Society of Geriatric Cardiology. Circulation. 2007;115:2570-2589. [PubMed: 17502591]
  70. [72]72. Patterson T, McConkey HZR, Ahmed-Jushuf F, et al. Long-term outcomes following heart team revascularization recommendations in complex coronary artery disease. J Am Heart Assoc. 2019;8: e011279. [PubMed: 30943827]
  71. [73]73. Writing Committee Members, Lawton JS, Tamis-Holland JE, Bangalore S, et al. 2021 ACC/AHA/ SCAI guideline for coronary artery revascularization: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2022;79(2):e21-e129. [PubMed: 34895950]
  72. [74]74. Stolker JM, Spertus JA, Cohen DJ, et al. Rethinking composite end points in clinical trials: insights from patients and trialists. Circulation. 2014;130:1254-1261. [PubMed: 25200210]
  73. [75]75. Kochar A, Deo SV, Charest B, et al. Preoperative frailty and adverse outcomes following coronary artery bypass grafting surgery in US veterans. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2023;71(9):2736-2747. [PubMed: 37083188]
  74. [76]76. Kochar A, Chen AY, Sharma PP, et al. Long-term mortality of older patients with acute myocardial infarction treated in US clinical practice. J Am Heart Assoc. 2018;7:e007230. [PubMed: 29960995]
  75. [77]77. Navarese EP, Rao SV, Krucoff MW. Age, STEMI, and Cardiogenic shock: never too old for PCI? J Am Coll Cardiol. 2019;73:1901-1904. [PubMed: 30999992]
  76. [78]78. Hochman JS, Sleeper LA, Webb JG, et al. for the SHOCK Investigators. Early revascularization in acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock. N Engl J Med. 1999;341:625-634. [PubMed: 10460813]
  77. [79]79. Dzavik V, Sleeper LA, Cocke TP, et al. Early revascularization is associated with improved survival in elderly patients with acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock: a report from the SHOCK trial registry. Eur Heart J. 2003;24:828-837. [PubMed: 12727150]
  78. [80]80. Damluji AA, Bandeen-Roche K, Berkower C, et al. Percutaneous coronary intervention in older patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction and cardiogenic shock. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2019;73:1890-1900. [PubMed: 30999991]
  79. [81]81. Zeymer U, Hochadel M, Karcher AK, et al. Procedural success rates and mortality in elderly patients with percutaneous coronary intervention for cardiogenic shock. J Am Coll Cardiol Intv. 2019;12:1853-1859.
  80. [82]82. Olenski AR, Zimerman A, Coussens S, Jena AB. Behavioral heuristics in coronary-artery bypass graft surgery. N Engl J Med. 2020;382:778-779. [PubMed: 32074429]
  81. [83]83. Criqui MH, Matsushita K, Aboyans V, et al. Lower extremity peripheral artery disease: contemporary epidemiology, management gaps, and future directions: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association. Circulation. 2021;144:e171-e191. [PubMed: 34315230]
  82. [84]84. Mozaffarian D, Benjamin EJ, Go AS, et al. Heart disease and stroke statistics-2016 update: a report from the American Heart Association. Circulation. 2016;133:e38-e360. [PubMed: 26673558]
  83. [85]85. Resnick HE, Lindsay RS, McDermott MM, et al. Relationship of high and low ankle brachial index to all-cause and cardiovascular disease mortality: the Strong Heart Study. Circulation. 2004;109: 733-739. [PubMed: 14970108]
  84. [86]86. Henley SJ, Asman K, Momin B, et al. Smoking cessation behaviors among older U.S. adults. Prev Med Rep. 2019;16:100978. [PubMed: 31660285]
  85. [87]87. Dick P, Barth B, Mlekusch W, et al. Complications after peripheral vascular interventions in octogenarians. J Endovasc Ther. 2008;15:383-389. [PubMed: 18729563]
  86. [88]88. Kim TI, Loh S, DeWan A, et al. Major adverse limb events among patients with premature peripheral artery disease compared with those at the common age undergoing revascularization in the Vascular Quality Initiative. Ann Vasc Surg. 2022;87:188-197. [PubMed: 35926786]
  87. [89]89. Rajamani K, Kennedy KF, Ruggiero NJ, Rosenfield K, Spertus J, Chaturvedi S. Outcomes of carotid endarterectomy in the elderly: report from the National Cardiovascular Data Registry. Stroke. 2013;44:1172-1174. [PubMed: 23422084]
  88. [90]90. Chiam PT, Roubin GS, Panagopoulos G, et al. One-year clinical outcomes, midterm survival, and predictors of mortality after carotid stenting in elderly patients. Circulation. 2009;119:2343-2348. [PubMed: 19380623]
  89. [91]91. Khan SU, Riaz H, Khan MU, et al. Meta-analysis of temporal and surgical risk dependent associations with outcomes after transcatheter versus surgical aortic valve implantation. Am J Cardiol. 2019;124:1608-1614. [PubMed: 31521258]
  90. [92]92. Généreux P, Pibarot P, Redfors B, et al. Staging classification of aortic stenosis based on the extent of cardiac damage. Eur Heart J. 2017;38: 3351-3358. [PubMed: 29020232]
  91. [93]93. Arsalan M, Szerlip M, Vemulapalli S, et al. Should transcatheter aortic valve replacement be performed in nonagenarians? Insights from the STS/ACC TVT registry. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2016;67: 1387-1395. [PubMed: 27012397]
  92. [94]94. Attinger-Toller A, Ferrari E, Tueller D, et al. Age-related outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve replacement: insights from the SwissTAVI registry. J Am Coll Cardiol Intv. 2021;14:952-960.
  93. [95]95. Beyersdorf F, Vahanian A, Milojevic M, et al. 2021 ESC/EACTS guidelines for the management of valvular heart disease: developed by the Task Force for the Management of Valvular Heart Disease of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS). Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2021;60:727-800. [PubMed: 34453161]
  94. [97]97. Kodali SK, Velagapudi P, Hahn RT, Abbott D, Leon MB. Valvular heart disease in patients ≥80 years of age. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2018;71:2058-2072. [PubMed: 29724358]
  95. [98]98. Kim DH, Afilalo J, Shi SM, et al. Evaluation of changes in functional status in the year after aortic valve replacement. JAMA Intern Med. 2019;179: 383-391. [PubMed: 30715097]
  96. [99]99. Mamane S, Mullie L, Lok Ok, Choo W, et al. Sarcopenia in older adults undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2019;74:3178-3180. [PubMed: 31856975]
  97. [100]100. Shibata K, Yamamoto M, Kano S, et al. Importance of geriatric nutritional risk index assessment in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement. Am Heart J. 2018;202: 68-75. [PubMed: 29883896]
  98. [101]101. Okuno T, Asami M, Heg D, et al. Impact of left ventricular outflow tract calcification on procedural outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve replacement. J Am Coll Cardiol Intv. 2020;13: 1789-1799.
  99. [102]102. Barbanti M, Costa G, Picci A, et al. Coronary cannulation after transcatheter aortic valve replacement: the RE-ACCESS study. J Am Coll Cardiol Intv. 2020;13:2542-2555.
  100. [103]103. Rodés-Cabau J, Kahlert P, Neumann FJ, et al. Feasibility and exploratory efficacy evaluation of the Embrella Embolic Deflector system for the prevention of cerebral emboli in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement: the PROTAVI-C pilot study. J Am Coll Cardiol Intv. 2014;7:1146-1155.
  101. [104]104. De Silva T, Faraci F. Contributions of aging to cerebral small vessel disease. Ann Rev Physiol. 2020;82:275-295. [PubMed: 31618600]
  102. [105]105. Alkhouli M, Alqahtani F, Harris AH, Hohmann SF, Rihal CS. Early experience with cerebral embolic protection during transcatheter aortic valve replacement in the United States. JAMA Intern Med. 2020;180:783-784. [PubMed: 32091552]
  103. [106]106. Danson E, Hansen P, Sen S, Davies J, Meredith I, Bhindi R. Assessment, treatment, and prognostic implications of CAD in patients undergoing TAVI. Nat Rev Cardiol. 2016;13:276285. [PubMed: 26864912]
  104. [107]107. Tarantini G, Tang G, Nai Fovino L, et al. Management of coronary artery disease in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation. A clinical consensus statement from the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions in collaboration with the ESC Working Group on Cardiovascular Surgery. EuroIntervention. 2023;19:37-52. [PubMed: 36811935]
  105. [108]108. Lateef N, Khan MS, Deo SV, et al. Meta-analysis comparing outcomes in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation with versus without percutaneous coronary intervention. Am J Cardiol. 2019;124:1757-1764. [PubMed: 31575422]
  106. [109]109. Patterson T, Clayton T, Dodd M, et al. ACTIVATION (Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Prior to Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation): a randomized clinical trial. J Am Coll Cardiol Intv. 2021;14:1965-1974.
  107. [110]110. Généreux P, Pibarot P, Redfors B, et al. Evolution and prognostic impact of cardiac damage after aortic valve replacement. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2022;80:783-800. [PubMed: 35595203]
  108. [111]111. d'Arcy JL, Coffey S, Loudon MA, et al. Large-scale community echocardiographic screening reveals a major burden of undiagnosed valvular heart disease in older people: the OxV ALVE Population Cohort Study. Eur Heart J. 2016;37:3515-3522. [PubMed: 27354049]
  109. [112]112. Nombela-Franco L, Eltchaninoff H, Zahn R, et al. Clinical impact and evolution of mitral regurgitation following transcatheter aortic valve replacement: a meta-analysis. Heart. 2015;101: 1395-1405. [PubMed: 26060121]
  110. [113]113. Sannino A, Losi MA, Schiattarella GG, et al. Meta-analysis of mortality outcomes and mitral regurgitation evolution in 4,839 patients having transcatheter aortic valve implantation for severe aortic stenosis. Am J Cardiol. 2014;114:875-882. [PubMed: 25092192]
  111. [114]114. Khan F, Okuno T, Malebranche D, et al. Transcatheter aortic valve replacement in patients with multivalvular heart disease. J Am Coll Cardiol Intv. 2020;13:1503-1514.
  112. [115]115. Abdelghani M, Abdel-Wahab M, Hemetsberger R, et al. Fate and long-term prognostic implications of mitral regurgitation in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement. Int J Cardiol. 2019;288:39-43. [PubMed: 30948219]
  113. [116]116. Nitsche C, Scully PR, Patel KP, et al. Prevalence and outcomes of concomitant aortic stenosis and cardiac amyloidosis. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2021;77:128-139. [PubMed: 33181246]
  114. [117]117. Scully PR, Patel KP, Treibel TA, et al. Prevalence and outcome of dual aortic stenosis and cardiac amyloid pathology in patients referred for transcatheter aortic valve implantation. Eur Heart J. 2020;41:2759-2767. [PubMed: 32267922]
  115. [118]118. Alkhouli M, Alqahtani F, Aljohani S, Alvi M, Holmes DR. Burden of atrial fibrillation-associated ischemic stroke in the United States. J Am Coll Cardiol EP. 2018;4:618-625.
  116. [119]119. Alkhouli M, Noseworthy PA, Rihal CS, Holmes DR Jr. Stroke prevention in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation: a stakeholder perspective. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2018;71:2790-2801. [PubMed: 29903352]
  117. [120]120. Alkhouli M Stroke prevention in very elderly patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation revisited. Mayo Clin Proc. 2021;96:13-15. [PubMed: 33413808]
  118. [121]121. Hijazi M, Aljohani S, Alqahtani F, et al. Perception of the risk of stroke and the risks and benefits of oral anticoagulation for stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation: a cross-sectional study. Mayo Clin Proc. 2019;94:1015-1023. [PubMed: 30935708]
  119. [122]122. Munir MB, Hlavacek P, Keshishian A, et al. Oral anticoagulant underutilization among elderly patients with atrial fibrillation: insights from the United States Medicare database. J Interv Card Electrophysiol. 2023;66:771-782. [PubMed: 35804258]
  120. [123]123. Alkhouli M, Friedman PA. Ischemic stroke risk in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation: JACC review topic of the week. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2019;74:3050-3065. [PubMed: 31865973]
  121. [124]124. Siddiqi TJ, Usman MS, Shahid I, et al. Utility of the CHA 2 DS 2 -V ASc score for predicting ischaemic stroke in patients with or without atrial fibrillation: a systematic review and metaanalysis. Eur J Prev Cardiol. 2022;29:625-631. [PubMed: 33693717]
  122. [125]125. Holmes DR Jr, Alkhouli M, Reddy V. Left atrial appendage occlusion for the unmet clinical needs of stroke prevention in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. Mayo Clin Proc. 2019;94:864-874. [PubMed: 30962008]
  123. [126]126. Sanjoy SS, Choi YH, Sparrow RT, et al. Outcomes of elderly patients undergoing left atrial appendage closure. J Am Heart Assoc. 2021;10: e021973. [PubMed: 34558289]
  124. [127]127. Sulaiman S, Roy K, Wang H, et al. Left atrial appendage occlusion in the elderly: insights from PROTECT-AF, PREVAIL, and continuous access registries. J Am Coll Cardiol EP. 2023;9:669676.
  125. [128]128. Freixa X, Schmidt B, Mazzone P, et al. Comparative data on left atrial appendage occlusion efficacy and clinical outcomes by age group in the Amplatzer Amulet Occluder Observational Study. Europace. 2021;23:238-246. [PubMed: 33279979]
  126. [129]129. Mesnier J, Cruz-Gonzalez I, Arzamendi D, et al. Incidence and predictors of early death in patients undergoing percutaneous left atrial appendage closure. J Am Coll Cardiol EP. 2022;8: 1093-1102.
  127. [130]130. Price MJ, Slotwiner D, Du C, et al. Clinical outcomes at 1 year following transcatheter left atrial appendage occlusion in the United States. J Am Coll Cardiol Intv. 2022;15:741-750.
  128. [131]131. Freeman JV, Higgins AY, Wang Y, et al. Antithrombotic therapy after left atrial appendage occlusion in patients with atrial fibrillation. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2022;79:1785-1798. [PubMed: 35512858]
  129. [132]132. Alkhouli M, Moussa I, Deshmukh A, Ammash NM, Klaas JP, Holmes DR. The heart brain team and patient-centered management of ischemic stroke. J Am Coll Cardiol Adv. 2022;1:100014.
  130. [133]133. DeSimone CV, Graff-Radford J, El-Harasis MA, Rabinstein AA, Asirvatham SJ, Holmes DR Jr. Cerebral amyloid angiopathy: diagnosis, clinical implications, and management strategies in atrial fibrillation. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2017;70:1173-1182. [PubMed: 28838368]
  131. [134]134. Ward R, Ponamgi S, DeSimone CV, et al. Utility of HAS-BLED and CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc scores among patients with atrial fibrillation and imaging evidence of cerebral amyloid angiopathy. Mayo Clin Proc. 2020;95:2090-2098. [PubMed: 32829908]
  132. [135]135. Schrag M, Mac Grory B, Nackenoff A, et al. Left atrial appendage closure for patients with cerebral amyloid angiopathy and atrial fibrillation: the LAA-CAA cohort. Transl Stroke Res. 2021;12: 259-265. [PubMed: 32770310]
  133. [136]136. Alkhouli M, Sievert H, Holmes DR. Patent foramen ovale closure for secondary stroke prevention. Eur Heart J. 2019;40:2339-2350. [PubMed: 30957864]
  134. [137]137. Alkhouli M, Van Houten HK, Yao X, Holmes DR. Effectiveness of transcatheter closure of patent foramen ovale in clinical practice. J Am Heart Assoc. 2023;12:e030321. [PubMed: 37489748]
  135. [138]138. Alkhouli M, Gagel A, Mathur M, O'Murchu B. Platypnea-orthodeoxia syndrome: an unusual complication of partial liver resection. Intern Med. 2015;54:1067-1069. [PubMed: 25948349]
  136. [139]139. Alperi A, Guedeney P, Horlick E, et al. Transcatheter closure of patent foramen ovale in older patients with cryptogenic thromboembolic events. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2022;15:e011652. [PubMed: 35735021]
  137. [140]140. Ntaios G, Lip GYH, Vemmos K, et al. Age- and sex-specific analysis of patients with embolic stroke of undetermined source. Neurology. 2017;89:532-539. [PubMed: 28687720]
  138. [141]141. Mazzucco S, Li L, Rothwell PM. Prognosis of cryptogenic stroke with patent foramen ovale at older ages and implications for trials: a population-based study and systematic review. JAMA Neurol. 2020;77:1279-1287. [PubMed: 32628255]
  139. [143]143. Stone GW, Lindenfeld J, Abraham WT, et al. Transcatheter mitral-valve repair in patients with heart failure. N Engl J Med. 2018;379:2307-2318. [PubMed: 30280640]
  140. [144]144. Giordano A, Biondi-Zoccai G, Finizio F, et al. Characteristics and outcomes of MitraClip in octogenarians: evidence from 1853 patients in the GIOTTO registry. Int J Cardiol. 2021;342:6571. [PubMed: 34375704]
  141. [145]145. Geis N, Raake P, Mereles D, et al. Percutaneous repair of severe mitral valve regurgitation secondary to chordae rupture in octogenarians using MitraClip. J Interv Cardiol. 2018;31:76-82. [PubMed: 29027267]
  142. [146]146. Makkar RR, Chikwe J, Chakravarty T, et al. Transcatheter mitral valve repair for degenerative mitral regurgitation. JAMA. 2023;329:1778-1788. [PubMed: 37219553]
  143. [147]147. Kodali SK, Hahn RT, Davidson CJ, et al. 1-Year outcomes of transcatheter tricuspid valve repair. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2023;81:1766-1776. [PubMed: 37137586]
  144. [148]148. Sorajja P, Whisenant B, Hamid N, et al. Transcatheter repair for patients with tricuspid regurgitation. N Engl J Med. 2023;388:1833-1842. [PubMed: 36876753]
  145. [149]149. Tsevat J, Dawson NV, Wu AW, et al. , for the HELP Investigators. Health values of hospitalized patients 80 years or older. JAMA. 1998;279:371-375. [PubMed: 9459470]
  146. [150]150. Lewis EF, Johnson PA, Johnson W, Collins C, Griffin L, Stevenson LW. Preferences for quality of life or survival expressed by patients with heart failure. J Heart Lung Transplant. 2001;20:10161024. [PubMed: 11557198]
  147. [151]151. Reynolds MR, Magnuson EA, Lei Y, et al. Health-related quality of life after transcatheter aortic valve replacement in inoperable patients with severe aortic stenosis. Circulation. 2011;124: 1964-1972. [PubMed: 21969017]
  148. [152]152. Chung M, Butala NM, Faridi KF, et al. Days at home after transcatheter or surgical aortic valve replacement in high-risk patients. Am Heart J. 2023;255:125-136. [PubMed: 36309128]
  149. [153]153. Arnold SV, Chinnakondepalli KM, Spertus JA, et al. Health Status after transcatheter mitral-valve repair in heart failure and secondary mitral regurgitation: COAPT trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2019;73:2123-2132. [PubMed: 30894288]
  150. [154]154. Attia ZI, Kapa S, Lopez-Jimenez F, et al. Screening for cardiac contractile dysfunction using an artificial intelligence-enabled electrocardiogram. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2019;25:70-74.
  151. [155]155. Yancy CW, Jessup M, Bozkurt B, et al. 2013 ACCF/AHA guideline for the management of heart failure: executive summary: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/ American Heart Association Task Force on practice guidelines. Circulation. 2013;128:18101852. [PubMed: 23741057]
  152. [156]156. Sengupta S, Biswal S, Titus J, et al. A novel breakthrough in wrist-worn transdermal troponin-Isensor assessment for acute myocardial infarction. Eur Heart J Digit Health. 2023;4:145-154. [PubMed: 37265867]
  153. [157]157. Wood DA, Lauck SB, Cairns JA, et al. The Vancouver 3M (Multidisciplinary, Multimodality, but Minimalist) clinical pathway facilitates safe next-day discharge home at low-, medium-, and high-volume transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement centers: the 3M TAVR study. J Am Coll Cardiol Intv. 2019;12:459-469.
  154. [158]158. Amioka N, Takaishi A, Nakamura K, et al. Innovative clinical pathway shortened the length of hospital stay and prevented readmission in patients with acute decompensated heart failure. J Cardiol. 2022;80:232-239. [PubMed: 35428556]
  155. [159]159. Fried LP, Tangen CM, Walston J, et al. for the Cardiovascular Health Study Collaborative Research Group. Frailty in older adults: evidence for a phenotype. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2001;56(3):M146-M156. [PubMed: 11253156]

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Damluji, A. A., Nanna, M. G., Rymer, J., Kochar, A., Lowenstern, A., Baron, S. J., Narins, C. R., & Alkhouli, M.
Affiliations
  • Johns Hopkins University (US)
  • Yale University (US)
  • Duke University (US)
  • Brigham and Women's Hospital (US)
  • Vanderbilt University Medical Center (US)
  • Massachusetts General Hospital (US)
  • University of Rochester (US)
  • Mayo Clinic (US)
Corresponding author
Alkhouli, Mohamad
ORCID
Venue
JACC: Cardiovascular Interventions
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2024-04
Volume
17
Issue
8
Pages
961-978
ISSN
  • 1876-7605 (ISSN-L)
  • 1936-8798
DOI
10.1016/j.jcin.2024.01.284
PMC
PMC11097960
OpenAlex
W4394582273
Cited by
53
References
3
Citations by year
2026: 17 · 2025: 26 · 2024: 10
FWCI
5.88
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • JACC: Cardiovascular Interventions (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • NHLBI
  • American Heart Association
  • American College of Cardiology Foundation
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Coronary Interventions and Diagnostics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Geriatrics and Gerontology › Frailty in Older Adults
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Cardiac Valve Diseases and Treatments
Keywords
chronological age, biological aging, aging, older adults, interventional cardiology, transcatheter interventions, structural heart disease, gerotherapeutics, age-related risk, procedural adverse events, patient-centered outcomes
MeSH terms
Age Factors, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Aging, Cardiology, Cardiovascular Diseases, Female, Cardiac Catheterization, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Risk Factors, Geriatric Assessment, Treatment Outcome, Risk Assessment

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review