首页> 外文期刊>The American Journal of Cardiology >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.
【24h】

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.

机译:四种不同风险评分对初次经皮冠状动脉介入治疗ST抬高急性心肌梗死患者预后的预测价值比较。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

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.
机译:准确的风险分层在急性冠脉综合征患者的治疗中具有重要作用。即使在明确定义了早期治疗选择的ST抬高急性心肌梗死(STEMI)患者中,风险分层也会影响早期和晚期治疗决策。我们旨在比较用于评估STEMI患者的4个风险评分的预后价值。我们对从2001年1月至2006年6月接受STEMI初次经皮冠状动脉介入治疗的所有患者进行了前瞻性登记。不包括心源性休克患者。该分析共纳入855名连续患者(年龄60.5 +/- 13岁,女性19%,糖尿病28%,前壁心肌梗死48%)。对于每位患者,均计算了心肌梗塞溶栓(TIMI),可控制的阿昔单抗和设备检查以降低晚期血管成形术并发症(CADILLAC),心肌梗死的原发性血管成形术(PAMI)和急性冠脉事件全球注册系统(GRACE)风险评分使用特定的临床变量和血管造影特征。评估了30天和1年的临床结局。使用曲线下面积或C统计方法评估4个风险评分的预测准确性。 CADILLAC,TIMI和PAMI风险评分对30天和1年死亡率均具有较高的预测准确性(C统计范围为0.72至0.82),CADILLAC评分略有优势。这3个风险评分在30天的再梗塞预测中也表现良好(C统计范围为0.6至0.7)。 GRACE得分表现不佳,并且对死亡率的预测准确性低(C统计量0.47)。总之,使用CADILLAC,TIMI或PAMI风险评分对接受原发性经皮冠状动脉介入治疗的STEMI患者的风险分层提供了重要的预后信息,并能够准确识别高风险患者。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号