血浆脑钠尿肽前体水平联合TIMI评分对STEMI患者的预后评估价值

目的：探讨血浆脑钠尿肽前体（NT proBNP）联合心肌梗死溶栓（TIMI）危险评分对ST段抬高性急性心肌梗死（STEMI）患者住院期间及3个月随访期主要心血管事件（MACE ）发生率的预测价值。方法回顾性分析304例STEMI患者入院时血NT proBNP水平及TIMI危险评分。通过绘制受试者工作特征曲线（ROC）及应用Logistic回归分析,确定 NT proBNP 在评分中的分值及其最佳界值,建立 NT proBNP联合TIMI危险评分的新评分系统,比较其与常规TIMI评分对STEMI患者住院期及3个月随访期 MACE发生率预测价值。结果通过 ROC曲线下面积（AUC）分析发现,NTproBNP 的 AUC 为0.732（95%CI 0.670-0.794,P〈0.01）;预测MACE发生率的最佳界值为741。TIMI危险评分的AUC为0.792（95%CI0.735-0.848,P〈0.01）。NT proBNP联合TIMI危险评分的新评分系统的 AUC为0.836（95%CI 0.786-0.885,P〈0.01）,经配对比较,二者比较差异有统计学意义（Z=15.977,P〈0.01）。结论入院时 NTproBNP可以增强TIMI危险评分对 STEMI患者住院期及随访期 MACE发生率的预测价值。     

MHR与急性ST段抬高型心肌梗死的患者Gensini评分的关系

目的 探讨单核细胞和高密度脂蛋白胆固醇的比值（MHR）与急性ST段抬高型心肌梗死（STEMI）以及Gensini评分的关系,了解MHR对STEMI的预测价值。 方法 纳入南京医科大学第二附属医院行冠脉造影并确诊为STEMI的患者132例,并选取同期行冠脉造影结果为正常的82例患者为对照组,比较两组之间的一般资料及实验室检查;根据Gensini评分三分位法将STEMI组分为低危组、中危组及高危组,比较三组患者的一般资料及实验室检查结果;单因素及多因素Logistic回归分析STEMI的独立影响因素、Gensini评分高危的独立影响因素,并绘制受试者工作特征（ROC）曲线评价MHR对STEMI患者Gensini评分高危的预测价值。 结果 ①STEMI组的患有高血压病（P<0.05）比例高于对照组,男性、吸烟、糖尿病、白细胞计数、中性粒细胞计数、单核细胞计数、肌酐值、MHR等项目比例数值均高于对照组（均P<0.01）。②与低危组比较,中、高危组的年龄高（P<0.05）、MHR升高（P<0.01）、病变支数升高（P<0.01）;高危组的中性粒细胞计数升高（P<0.05）、低密度脂蛋白数值升高（P<0.05）;与中危组比较,高危组的总胆固醇、MHR、病变支数升高,差异具有统计学意义（P<0.05）。③性别、吸烟史、糖尿病是STEMI发生的独立影响因素。④低密度脂蛋白、MHR、病变支数是Gensini评分高危的独立危险因素。⑤ROC曲线结果示,MHR截止值取0.469时,对STEMI患者Gensini评分高危的诊断预测价值最高（灵敏度75.0%,特异度71.9%,曲线下面积0.750,95%CI:0.671～0.827,P<0.01）。结论①MHR不是STEMI发生的独立影响因素,而是STEMI患者Gensini评分高危的独立影响因素,可作为临床预测高危STEMI患者的指标。②MHR>0.469时,对STEMI患者Gensini评分高危最具有预测价值,可作为高危STEMI患者的截断值。     

GRACE评分联合WMR对STEMI患者急诊PCI术后发生院内MACE的预测价值

［摘要］　目的　探讨全球急性冠状动脉事件注册（GRACE）评分联合白细胞（WBC）计数与平均血小板体积比（WMR）对急性ST段抬高型心肌梗死（STEMI）患者急诊经皮冠状动脉介入治疗（PCI）术后发生院内主要不良心血管事件（MACE）的预测价值。方法　回顾性分析2021年1月至2022年3月于襄阳市中心医院接受急诊PCI治疗的349例STEMI患者临床资料。根据院内MACE发生情况,将患者分为MACE组(n=47)和非MACE组(n=302)。比较不同分组患者的临床资料,采用Cox回归分析STEMI患者PCI术后发生院内MACE的危险因素,采用ROC曲线分析评估GRACE评分联合WMR对STEMI患者PCI术后发生院内MACE的预测价值。结果　与非MACE组相比,MACE组年龄较大,收缩压、舒张压和左心室射血分数（LVEF）较低;心率、Killip分级≥Ⅱ的比率、GRACE评分、WBC、WMR、中性粒细胞与淋巴细胞比值（NLR）、空腹血糖（FPG）、肌酐（Cr）、丙氨酸氨基转移酶（ALT）、天门冬氨酸氨基转移酶（AST）和肌酸激酶MB同工酶（CK-MB）较高,差异均有统计学意义（P<0.05）。多因素Cox回归分析结果显示,较高的GRACE评分和WMR是促进STEMI患者发生院内MACE的独立危险因素（P<0.05）。ROC曲线分析结果显示,GRACE评分和WMR均能有效预测STEMI患者PCI术后发生院内MACE（P<0.05）,且两者联合的预测效能更优［AUC(95%CI)=0.824(0.750～0.897),P<0.001］,灵敏度和特异度分别为74.50%、80.50%。结论　GRACE评分联合WMR对STEMI患者PCI术后发生院内MACE具有良好的预测价值,有助于临床工作者进行更精准的风险分层和治疗决策制定。     

γ谷氨酰转移酶对急性ST段抬高心肌梗死患者预后的预测价值

目的: 探讨γ谷氨酰转移酶（gamma-glutamyltransferase,GGT）对行急诊介入治疗的ST段抬高心肌梗死（ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction,STEMI）患者的主要心脏不良事件(major adverse cardiac events,MACE）的预测作用。方法: STEMI并行急诊经皮冠脉介入治疗患者112例。收集入选患者的基本资料,检测血清GGT,住院期间及出院后每月定期随访MACE。分析GGT预测MACE的价值。结果: 应用ROC曲线分析GGT对112例患者发生MACE的预测作用,随访30 d ROC曲线下面积（AUC）为0.576,P>0.05。3个月及6个月AUC分别为0.661和0.632,均P<0.05。得到的截断点为28.65 U/L。但GGT>28.65 U/L 和GGT<28.65U/L两组间年龄存在统计学差异（P<0.01）,不具可比性。对70岁及70岁以上患者进行分析时,在随访的30 d、3个月和6个月曲线下面积均<0.5,无预测价值。70岁以下患者,30 d、3个月和6个月时AUC分别为0.669,0.715和0.720,分别为P<0.05,P<0.01和P<0.01,得到的截断点为28.65 U/L。把70岁以下患者GGT水平以28.65 U/L为截断点分为两组,GGT>28.65 U/L与GGT<28.65U/L组30 d,3个月及6个月MACE发生率为(28% vs. 10%,P<0.05),(47% vs. 12%,P<0.01)以及(50% vs. 15%,P<0.01)。在二项分类的多变量logistic回归分析中,GGT独立于年龄、性别、多支病变、心功能KillipⅡ级以上、前壁心肌梗死、血清肌酸激酶同工酶、左室射血分数预测3个月、6个月MACE发生（均P<0.01）。结论: GGT对行急诊介入治疗的年龄70岁以下STEMI患者预后有预测价值。     

血清甲状旁腺素水平与急诊PCI慢复流、室性心律失常的相关性与预测价值

目的 探讨急性ST段抬高型心肌梗死（STEMI）患者血清甲状旁腺素（PTH）水平与急诊经皮冠状动脉介入治疗（PCI）术中慢复流、围手术期（急诊室至术后72h）室性心律失常（VAs）的相关性与预测价值。 方法 连续性入选112例因STEMI接受急诊PCI治疗的患者,利用二分类Logistic回归分析模型评估PTH与慢复流及VAs是否独立相关,绘制ROC曲线评价其预测价值。 结果 PTH是介入术中慢复流（OR=5.768, 95%CI: 1.808-18.402, P<0.01）及围手术期中高危VAs（OR=18.278, 95%CI: 4.881-68.445, P<0.01）的独立预测因子,预测慢血流的ROC曲线下面积（AUC）为0.737 (95%CI: 0.634-0.841, P<0.01),其截断点为PTH=65.5pg/ml,灵敏度75%,特异度72%;预测VAs时,AUC为0.837 (95%CI: 0.759-0.914, P<0.01),截断点为PTH=61.9pg/ml,灵敏度82%,特异度73%。 结论 血清PTH水平与STEMI患者急诊PCI术中慢复流及围手术期VAs有一定相关性,并有较好的预测价值。     

血浆致动脉硬化指数在老年急性ST段抬高型心肌梗死患者心血管事件预测中的价值

目的探讨血浆致动脉硬化指数(AIP)对老年冠心病患者急性ST段抬高型心肌梗死(STEMI)后主要不良心血管事件(MACE)发生的预测价值。方法诊断为STEMI并自愿随访的老年患者218例,检测AIP、血生化及超声等指标。随访1年,根据是否发生MACE分为MACE组及无MACE组,比较两组临床资料、血生化、超声、AIP等指标,并运用受试者工作特征(ROC)曲线评价AIP对MACE的预测价值。结果 MACE组AIP水平显著高于无MACE组(P<0.05);Logistic多因素回归分析显示,AIP升高是STEMI后MACE发生的独立危险因素[优势比(OR)=1.507,P<0.05];在AIP预测MACE能力的ROC中,其曲线下面积为0.764(95%CI为0.680~0.874,P<0.05);当AIP取0.20时,其预测MACE的敏感性为76.32%,特异性为84.44%,准确性为83.03%。结论方便、经济的AIP检测对老年患者STEMI后MACE的发生具有一定的预测价值,尤其是AIP水平超过0.20时患者STEMI后发生MACE的风险较大。     

NSTE-ACS患者GRACE评分和NLR与冠状动脉病变的关系

目的 研究非ST段抬高型急性冠脉综合征（NSTE-ACS）患者全球急性冠状动脉事件注册（GRACE）危险评分、中性粒细胞/淋巴细胞比值（NLR）与冠状动脉病变程度的相关性。 方法 回顾性分析228例在我院住院并行冠脉造影的NSTE-ACS患者。根据GRACE评分将患者分为低危组、中危组及高危组。采用Gensini积分量化冠脉病变程度,按Gensini积分三分位间距将患者分为轻度、中度及重度病变组。分析GRACE评分、NLR与是否与不同程度的冠状动脉病变相关。 结果 ①GRACE危险分层中危组及高危组NLR及Gensini积分较低危组升高（P<0.01）,3支及左主干病变发生率高于低危组（P<0.01）。冠脉重度病变组GRACE危险评分、NLR均高于轻度病变组（P<0.01）。②GRACE危险评分及NLR与Gensini积分呈正相关关系。GRACE危险评分联合NLR对重度冠脉病变有中等预测价值（ROC曲线下面积 0.725,95%CI 0.653~0.798,P<0.01）。 结论 GRACE危险评分、NLR与NSTE-ACS患者冠状动脉病变有良好相关性,可作为严重冠状动脉病变早期预测因子。     

GRACE评分联合中性粒细胞与淋巴细胞比值对急性STEMI患者PCI后无复流现象的预测价值

目的:探讨GRACE评分联合中性粒细胞/淋巴细胞(NLR)水平与急性ST段抬高型心肌梗死(STEMI)患者接受直接经皮冠状动脉介入(PCI)治疗后无复流现象的关系及预测价值。方法:对2018年10月1日—2019年12月31日就诊于河北省人民医院心脏中心行直接PCI治疗的急性STEMI患者269例进行回顾性分析。根据冠状动脉造影结果分为复流组(225例)和无复流组(44例)。应用二元Logistic回归分析确定无复流现象的独立预测因子,绘制ROC曲线以评估GRACE评分、NLR及两者联合对无复流现象的预测价值。结果:共纳入269例患者,无复流发生率为16.3%。调整混杂因素后,二元Logistic回归分析显示GRACE评分(OR=1.011,95%CI1.002～1.020,P=0.017),NLR(OR=1.068,95%CI1.008～1.132,P=0.025)是无复流发生的独立预测因子。在无复流预测中,GRACE评分在ROC曲线下面积0.621(95%CI0.553～0.709),敏感性为79.5%,特异性为44.2%,最佳临界值为118.5;NLR在ROC曲线下面积0.614(95%CI0.512～0.715),敏感性为91.1%,特异性为38.6%,临界值为10.97。GRACE评分联合NLR(联合预测因子)在ROC曲线下面积为0.641(95%CI0.550～0.732,P=0.03)。分别比较联合预测因子与单独GRACE评分和单独NLR的预测能力,均无统计学差异(P0.05)。结论:GRACE评分、NLR均是无复流的独立预测因子,GRACE评分联合NLR可以预测STEMI患者PCI治疗后无复流现象的发生,但并未体现出优于单一使用GRACE评分或NLR的预测价值。     

CHA2DS2-VASc评分对急性ST段抬高型心肌梗死患者近期预后的预测价值

目的:本研究旨在探索CHA₂DS₂-VASc评分对急性ST段抬高型心肌梗死(STEMI)患者近期预后的预测价值。方法:回顾性分析7476例中国急性STEMI患者的基线及随访资料,按CHA₂DS₂-VASc评分将患者分为1分组(n=1815)、2~3分组(n=3585)、≥4分组(n=2076)。主要终点为30 d全因死亡,次要终点包括30 d再发心肌梗死、心原性休克、脑卒中及主要不良心血管事件(包括全因死亡、再发心肌梗死、恶性心律失常、心力衰竭和脑卒中)。应用单因素和多因素Cox回归分析评估CHA₂DS₂-VASc评分对急性STEMI患者30 d终点事件的影响。通过绘制ROC曲线,评估CHA₂DS₂-VASc评分对急性STEMI患者30 d死亡风险的预测价值。结果:与低CHA2DS2-VASc评分患者相比,高CHA₂DS₂-VASc评分患者的病情更重,合并症更多,而接受再灌注治疗及规范药物治疗的患者比例更低(P均<0.05)。随着CHA₂DS₂-VASc评分升高,急性STEMI患者30 d全因死亡率(1分组、2~3分组、≥4分组分别为2.0%、8.0%、23.7%)及再发心肌梗死、心原性休克、脑卒中、主要不良心血管事件的发生率均显著升高(P均<0.001)。多因素Cox回归分析显示,CHA₂DS₂-VASc评分是上述终点事件的独立预测因素。ROC曲线显示,在预测30 d全因死亡风险上,CHA2DS2-VASc评分的AUC与TIMI评分(0.756 vs.0.767)和GRACE评分(0.756 vs.0.769)间的差异均无统计学意义(P均>0.05)。结论:CHA₂DS₂-VASc评分是急性STEMI患者30 d终点事件的独立预测因素,其对急性STEMI患者30 d全因死亡风险的预测能力与TIMI评分和GRACE评分相当,且计算简单,可考虑用于急性STEMI患者的早期风险评估。     

非ST段抬高型急性冠脉综合征患者脑钠尿肽与GRACE危险评分的相关性及其预测价值

目的:探讨非ST段抬高型急性冠状动脉综合征（non-ST-segment elevated acute coronary syndrome,NSTE-ACS）患者血浆脑钠尿肽（brain natriuretic peptide,BNP）的水平与全球急性冠状动脉事件注册（global registry of acute coronary events,GRACE）评分及危险分层的关系,分析BNP对NSTE-ACS患者近期（6个月）发生主要不良心脏事件(major adverse cardiac event,MACE)的预测价值。方法: 入选2011年12月~2013年2月在我院心内科住院的NSTE-ACS患者194例,其中不稳定型心绞痛（unstable angina,UA）90例,急性非ST段抬高型心肌梗死（non-ST segment elevated myocardial infraction,NSTEMI）104例。入院后测定BNP及血脂水平。采用GRACE危险评分标准计算患者GRACE评分并进行危险分层,低危组59例,中危组65例,高危组75例。住院期间进行常规治疗。患者出院后随访6个月,观察终点为发生MACE的情况。结果: 将NSTE-ACS患者按GRACE评分进行危险分层,高危组BNP高于中危组和低危组（均P<0.01）,中危组BNP显著高于低危组（P<0.01）。血浆BNP水平与GRACE评分呈正相关（r=0.656,P<0.05）。随着GRACE评分越高,血浆BNP水平亦增高,住院期间、随访期MACE发生率也随之增高。结论: GRACE评分越高,BNP水平越高,在NSTE-ACS患者中,联合运用GRACE评分和BNP水平检测,在对其进行早期危险分层、评估预后方面有重要临床价值。     

急性冠脉综合征TIMI风险积分与脑钠尿肽及临床预后的关系

目的探讨TIM I风险积分对介入治疗后急性冠脉综合征（ACS）患者短期预后的预测作用及比较不同积分组血浆脑钠尿肽（BNP）水平。方法连续入选2004年11月至2005年4月因ST段抬高的心肌梗死（STEM I）在我院行经皮冠状动脉介入（PC I）治疗者75例,因不稳定型心绞痛（UAP）/非ST段抬高的心肌梗死（NSTEM I）在我院行PC I治疗者47例,入院时对入选患者进行心肌梗死溶栓试验（TIM I）风险积分。采用荧光免疫方法测定血浆BNP水平。结果在STEM I患者组,根据TIM I风险积分分为04分,59分,1014分3组。随着TIM I风险积分升高,各组病死率呈明显递增趋势。在多变量的Logistic回归分析中,TIM I风险积分能够独立预测住院期间、1个月和3个月病死率及住院期间、1个月主要心血管不良事件（MACE）发生率（均P<0.01）。不同的TIM I风险积分各组间血浆BNP水平有显著性差异（P<0.01）。在多元回归分析中,TIM I风险积分分组不受年龄、性别、家族史、吸烟、高胆固醇血症、高血压、糖尿病等因素的影响,而与血浆BNP水平呈独立正相关（r=0.52,P<0.01）。在UAP/NSTEM I患者组,根据TIM I风险积分分为02分,35分,57分3组。随着TIM I风险积分升高,各组病死率呈明显递增趋势。在多变量的Logistic回归分析中,TIM I风险积分能够独立预测3个月病死率及1个月和3个月MACE发生率（均P<0.01）。各组间血浆BNP水平有显著性差异（P<0.01）。在多元回归分析中,TIM I风险积分分组经年龄、性别、高胆固醇血症因素校正后与血浆BNP水平呈正相关（r=0.41,P<0.01）。结论TIM I风险积分能够较好地对ACS患者进行危险分层,预测短期病死率和MACE发生率。ACS患者按TIM I风险积分递增分组与血浆BNP水平呈正相关。TIM I风险积分越高组血浆BNP水平越高。     

危险评分对急性心肌梗死急诊介入干预患者远期预后的评价

目的 探讨心肌梗死(MI)溶栓疗法(TIMI)危险评分系统对ST段抬高的急性心肌梗死(STEMI)患者直接经皮冠状动脉介入干预(PCI)远期预后预测的价值。方法 应用TIMI危险评分系统的8个变量,分别累计各例的评分值,观察患者住院期并随访平均(23.9±3.8)个月的主要心血管事件(包括非致命心力衰竭、非致命再次心肌梗死、靶血管血运重建及心脏性死亡),分析入院时TIMI危险评分值对总心血管事件发生率的预测性。结果 373例STEMI患者随访期总心血管事件发生89例(平均发生率23.9％);随危险评分值的逐渐递增,其总心血管事件发生率进行性增高(对增高趋势,X2值统计,P<0.05);评分≥8分者总心血管事件是评分为0者的9倍;与<6分者比较,评分≥6分者心脏性死亡事件明显增高(25％比0,P<0.01),死亡 MI事件也显著增加(36.7％比2.6％,P<0.01)。无论患者入院时肌钙蛋白Ⅰ水平增高与否,其TIMI危险评分越高、则发生心脏不良事件的危险性越大。结论 入院时TIMI危险评分值增高,临床预后越差,TIMI危险评分法可能是对STEMI行直接PCI患者进行床旁定量危险评估与远期预后预测较为方便、实用的临床评价方法。     

Os Escores HEART,TIMI e GRACE para Predição de Eventos Cardiovasculares Adversos Maiores no Período de 30 Dias na Era de Troponina I de Alta Sensibilidade

BackgroundMultiple scoring systems have been designed to calculate the risk of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) in patients with chest pain. There is no data on whether the HEART score outperforms TIMI and GRACE in the prediction of MACE, especially in the era of high-sensitivity troponin assay and in an exclusively Latin-American population.ObjectiveTo compare the performance of the HEART, TIMI, and GRACE scores for predicting major cardiovascular events at 30 days of follow-up, in patients who consult for chest pain in the emergency department.MethodsHEART, TIMI, and GRACE scores were analyzed in 519 patients with chest pain at the emergency department. The primary endpoint was the occurrence of MACE within 30 days. The performance of the HEART score was compared with the TIMI and GRACE scores using the DeLong test with p values of 0.05 considered statistically significant.ResultsA total of 224 patients (43%) had MACE at 30 days. The C statistic for the HEART, TIMI, and GRACE score was 0.937, 0.844, and 0.797 respectively (p < 0.0001). A HEART score of 3 or less had a sensitivity of 99.5% and a negative predictive value of 99% to classify low risk patients correctly; both values were higher than those obtained by the other scores.ConclusionThe HEART score more effectively predicts cardiovascular events at 30 days of follow-up compared to the other scores. High-sensitivity troponins maintain this score’s previously demonstrated superiority. This score offers more precise identification of low-risk patients. (Arq Bras Cardiol. 2020; [online].ahead print, PP.0-0)     

Accuracy of Dedicated Risk Scores in Patients Undergoing Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Daily Clinical Practice

Background

Comparisons between dedicated risk scores in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (pPCI) in real-world clinical practice are scarce. The aim of this study was to assess the diagnostic performance of the Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events (GRACE), Primary Angioplasty in Myocardial Infarction (PAMI), Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI), and Zwolle scores in STEMI patients undergoing pPCI in contemporary clinical practice.

Methods

This was a prospective cohort study of consecutive patients with STEMI undergoing pPCI between December 2009 and November 2010 in a high-volume tertiary referral centre. The outcomes assessed were major cardiovascular events (MACEs) and death within 30 days. The diagnostic accuracy of the scores was assessed using receiver operating characteristic curves, and scores were compared using the DeLong method.

Results

During the study period, 501 patients were included. Within 30 days, 62 patients (12.4%) presented a MACE and 39 individuals (7.8%) died. All scores were statistically associated with death and MACE within 30 days (P < 0.01). The c-statistic and 95% confidence intervals for 30-day mortality were: GRACE, 0.84 (0.78-0.90); TIMI, 0.81 (0.74-0.87); Zwolle, 0.80 (0.73-0.87); and PAMI, 0.75 (0.68-0.82) (P < 0.01). There was no statistically significant difference regarding the accuracy of the TIMI, GRACE, and Zwolle scores for 30-day mortality, but the GRACE score was superior to the PAMI score (P < 0.01).

Conclusions

The TIMI, GRACE, and Zwolle scores performed equally well as predictors of mortality in patients who underwent pPCI in current practice. These results suggest that these scores are suitable options for risk assessment in a real-world setting.     

ST段抬高型心肌梗死患者D-二聚体与GRACE评分的关系

目的：探讨ST段抬高型心肌梗死（STEMI）患者血浆D-二聚体水平与全球急性冠状动脉事件注册（GRACE）评分的关系。方法：选择2013年1月——2014年6月在我科住院的急性ST段抬高型心肌梗死患者81例，入院后立即测定血浆D-二聚体浓度（采血时间距发病2 h-72 h），计算GRACE 评分并进行危险分层，分析STEMI患者血浆D-二聚体水平与GRACE评分及危险分层的关系。结果：根据GRACE评分将所有STEMI患者作危险分层，高危组患者D-二聚体含量的平方根明显高于中危组及低危组（P均＜0.01），中危组与低危组D-二聚体含量的平方根差异无统计学意义（P＞0.05）。将所有患者按D-二聚体含量的高低分为高DD组和低DD组，高DD组患者GRACE评分明显高于低DD组（P＜0.01）。STEMI患者D-二聚体的平方根与GRACE评分呈正相关（r=0. 457，P＜0.01）。结论：STEMI患者血浆D-二聚体水平越高，GRACE评分越高，两者具有良好的相关性。D-二聚体检测对于STEMI患者的危险分层具有参考意义。     

Comparison of the predictive value of four different risk scores for outcomes of patients with ST-elevation acute myocardial infarction undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention

Accurate risk stratification has an important role in the management of patients with acute coronary syndromes. Even in patients with ST-elevation acute myocardial infarction (STEMI), for whom early therapeutic options are well defined, risk stratification has an impact on early and late therapeutic decision making. We aimed to compare the prognostic value of 4 risk scores used to evaluate patients with STEMI. We conducted a prospective registry of all patients treated with primary percutaneous coronary intervention for STEMI from January 2001 to June 2006. Excluded were patients with cardiogenic shock. A total of 855 consecutive patients were included in the analysis (age 60.5 +/- 13 years, 19% women, 28% with diabetes, and 48% with anterior wall myocardial infarction). For each patient, the Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction (TIMI), Controlled Abciximab and Device Investigation to Lower Late Angioplasty complications (CADILLAC), Primary Angioplasty in Myocardial Infarction (PAMI), and Global Registry for Acute Coronary Events (GRACE) risk scores were calculated using specific clinical variables and angiographic characteristics. Thirty-day and 1-year clinical outcomes were assessed. The predictive accuracy of the 4 risk scores was evaluated using the area under the curve or C statistic method. The CADILLAC, TIMI, and PAMI risk scores all had relatively high predictive accuracy for 30-day and 1-year mortality (C statistic range 0.72 to 0.82), with slight superiority of the CADILLAC score. These 3 risk scores also performed well for prediction of reinfarction at 30 days (C statistic range 0.6 to 0.7). The GRACE score did not perform as well and had low predictive accuracy for mortality (C statistic 0.47). In conclusion, risk stratification of patients with STEMI undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention using the CADILLAC, TIMI, or PAMI risk scores provide important prognostic information and enables accurate identification of high-risk patients.     

Is it possible to simplify risk stratification scores for patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction undergoing primary angioplasty?

IntroductionThere are several risk scores for stratification of patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), the most widely used of which are the TIMI and GRACE scores. However, these are complex and require several variables. The aim of this study was to obtain a reduced model with fewer variables and similar predictive and discriminative ability.MethodsWe studied 607 patients (age 62 years, SD=13; 76% male) who were admitted with STEMI and underwent successful primary angioplasty. Our endpoints were all-cause in-hospital and 30-day mortality. Considering all variables from the TIMI and GRACE risk scores, multivariate logistic regression models were fitted to the data to identify the variables that best predicted death.ResultsCompared to the TIMI score, the GRACE score had better predictive and discriminative performance for in-hospital mortality, with similar results for 30-day mortality. After data modeling, the variables with highest predictive ability were age, serum creatinine, heart failure and the occurrence of cardiac arrest. The new predictive model was compared with the GRACE risk score, after internal validation using 10-fold cross validation. A similar discriminative performance was obtained and some improvement was achieved in estimates of probabilities of death (increased for patients who died and decreased for those who did not).ConclusionIt is possible to simplify risk stratification scores for STEMI and primary angioplasty using only four variables (age, serum creatinine, heart failure and cardiac arrest). This simplified model maintained a good predictive and discriminative performance for short-term mortality.     

Prognostic Value of TIMI Score versus GRACE Score in ST-segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction

Background

The TIMI Score for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) was created and validated specifically for this clinical scenario, while the GRACE score is generic to any type of acute coronary syndrome.

Objective

Between TIMI and GRACE scores, identify the one of better prognostic performance in patients with STEMI.

Methods

We included 152 individuals consecutively admitted for STEMI. The TIMI and GRACE scores were tested for their discriminatory ability (C-statistics) and calibration (Hosmer-Lemeshow) in relation to hospital death.

Results

The TIMI score showed equal distribution of patients in the ranges of low, intermediate and high risk (39 %, 27 % and 34 %, respectively), as opposed to the GRACE Score that showed predominant distribution at low risk (80 %, 13 % and 7%, respectively). Case-fatality was 11%. The C-statistics of the TIMI score was 0.87 (95%CI = 0.76 to 0.98), similar to GRACE (0.87, 95%CI = 0.75 to 0.99) - p = 0.71. The TIMI score showed satisfactory calibration represented by χ2 = 1.4 (p = 0.92), well above the calibration of the GRACE score, which showed χ2 = 14 (p = 0.08). This calibration is reflected in the expected incidence ranges for low, intermediate and high risk, according to the TIMI score (0 %, 4.9 % and 25 %, respectively), differently to GRACE (2.4%, 25% and 73%), which featured middle range incidence inappropriately.

Conclusion

Although the scores show similar discriminatory capacity for hospital death, the TIMI score had better calibration than GRACE. These findings need to be validated populations of different risk profiles.