I was just going over some old pacemaker literature–you know, journal articles that had appeared a while back–and I came across a study that seems particularly timely today. Done way back in 1996 by Win-Kuang Shen, MD and colleagues, the article examined whether or not pacemaker implanted in 80 and 90 years old were helpful.
Pacemakers treat rhythm disorders and rhythm disorders are statistically more likely to occur in older people. I have read that the average age of a pacemaker patient in the U.S. is 73. True, kids get pacemakers, even babies, but most people who need pacemakers are older individuals.
There are cases on record where a pacemaker has been implanted for the first time in a centenarian, and replacements in people over 100 are not unheard of.
But when a person is 80 or 90 years old, does a pacemaker really help? In this particular study of 157 people in the 80-90 age bracket who received a pacemaker to help manage their heart condition, a full 75% found that the pacemaker improved their symptoms.
That's pretty amazing, considering that about half of these patients (45%) were in nursing homes to begin with. While the article did not contain specifics about this, the nursing home patients probably had other conditions and symptoms.
If three-quarters of these elderly patients benefited from pacing, it is likely that younger, fitter, stronger patients would have similar if not better results.
The article is entitled Survival and functional independence after implantation of a permanent pacemaker in octogenarians and nonagenarians: a population based study and it appeared in 1996 in the Annals of Internal Medicine.
