Ali Shafiq1, Jae-Sik Jang2, Faraz Kureshi3, Timothy J Fendler3, Kensey Gosch4, Phil G Jones3, David J Cohen3, Richard Bach5, John A Spertus3. 1. Cardiovascular Outcomes Research, Saint Luke's Mid America Heart Institute, Kansas City, Missouri; Division of Cardiology, University of Missouri, Kansas City, Missouri. Electronic address: shafiqa@umkc.edu. 2. Division of Cardiology, Inje University Busan Paik Hospital, Busan, Korea. 3. Cardiovascular Outcomes Research, Saint Luke's Mid America Heart Institute, Kansas City, Missouri; Division of Cardiology, University of Missouri, Kansas City, Missouri. 4. Cardiovascular Outcomes Research, Saint Luke's Mid America Heart Institute, Kansas City, Missouri. 5. Division of Cardiology, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Up to half of patients with non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) do not receive dual antiplatelet therapy before angiography "pretreatment" because of the risk of increased bleeding if coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) operation is needed. Several models have been published that predict the likelihood of CABG after NSTEMI, but they have not been independently validated. The purpose of this study was to validate these models and improve the best one. METHODS: We studied patients with NSTEMI who were enrolled in the 24-center Translational Research Investigating Underlying Disparities in Acute Myocardial Infarction Patients' Health Status (TRIUMPH) registry between 2005 and 2008. Previous CABG prediction models were assessed using c-statistics and calibration assessments to determine the best model. Variables from TRIUMPH likely to be associated with CABG were tested to see whether they could improve the best model's performance. RESULTS: Among 2,473 patients with NSTEMI, 11.8% underwent in-hospital CABG. C-statistics for the Modified Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction, Treat Angina With Aggrastat and Determine the Cost of Therapy With an Invasive or Conservative Strategy-Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction 18, Poppe, and Global Risk of Acute Coronary Events (GRACE) models were 0.54, 0.61, 0.61, and 0.62, respectively. The GRACE model showed the best discrimination and calibration. From the TRIUMPH registry, preselected variables were added to the GRACE model but did not significantly improve model discrimination. A GRACE model risk score of less than 9 had high sensitivity (96%), thus making it useful for predicting patients with NSTEMI who were at low risk for requiring CABG, which included approximately 21% of patients with NSTEMI. CONCLUSIONS: This study could not improve on the GRACE model, which had the best predictive value for identifying a need for CABG after NSTEMI with a broader range of predicted risk levels and high sensitivity, especially in patients with scores lower than 9.
BACKGROUND: Up to half of patients with non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) do not receive dual antiplatelet therapy before angiography "pretreatment" because of the risk of increased bleeding if coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) operation is needed. Several models have been published that predict the likelihood of CABG after NSTEMI, but they have not been independently validated. The purpose of this study was to validate these models and improve the best one. METHODS: We studied patients with NSTEMI who were enrolled in the 24-center Translational Research Investigating Underlying Disparities in Acute Myocardial InfarctionPatients' Health Status (TRIUMPH) registry between 2005 and 2008. Previous CABG prediction models were assessed using c-statistics and calibration assessments to determine the best model. Variables from TRIUMPH likely to be associated with CABG were tested to see whether they could improve the best model's performance. RESULTS: Among 2,473 patients with NSTEMI, 11.8% underwent in-hospital CABG. C-statistics for the Modified Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction, Treat Angina With Aggrastat and Determine the Cost of Therapy With an Invasive or Conservative Strategy-Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction 18, Poppe, and Global Risk of Acute Coronary Events (GRACE) models were 0.54, 0.61, 0.61, and 0.62, respectively. The GRACE model showed the best discrimination and calibration. From the TRIUMPH registry, preselected variables were added to the GRACE model but did not significantly improve model discrimination. A GRACE model risk score of less than 9 had high sensitivity (96%), thus making it useful for predicting patients with NSTEMI who were at low risk for requiring CABG, which included approximately 21% of patients with NSTEMI. CONCLUSIONS: This study could not improve on the GRACE model, which had the best predictive value for identifying a need for CABG after NSTEMI with a broader range of predicted risk levels and high sensitivity, especially in patients with scores lower than 9.
Authors: Glenn N Levine; Eric R Bates; James C Blankenship; Steven R Bailey; John A Bittl; Bojan Cercek; Charles E Chambers; Stephen G Ellis; Robert A Guyton; Steven M Hollenberg; Umesh N Khot; Richard A Lange; Laura Mauri; Roxana Mehran; Issam D Moussa; Debabrata Mukherjee; Brahmajee K Nallamothu; Henry H Ting Journal: Catheter Cardiovasc Interv Date: 2012-02-15 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Gilles Montalescot; Leonardo Bolognese; Dariusz Dudek; Patrick Goldstein; Christian Hamm; Jean-Francois Tanguay; Jurrien M ten Berg; Debra L Miller; Timothy M Costigan; Jochen Goedicke; Johanne Silvain; Paolo Angioli; Jacek Legutko; Margit Niethammer; Zuzana Motovska; Joseph A Jakubowski; Guillaume Cayla; Luigi Oltrona Visconti; Eric Vicaut; Petr Widimsky Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2013-09-01 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Raimondo Ascione; Arup Ghosh; Chris A Rogers; Alan Cohen; Chris Monk; Gianni D Angelini Journal: Ann Thorac Surg Date: 2005-04 Impact factor: 4.330
Authors: Nicholas L M Cruden; Kristin Morch; Daniel R Wong; W Peter Klinke; John Ofiesh; J David Hilton Journal: Am Heart J Date: 2011-02 Impact factor: 4.749
Authors: Suzanne V Arnold; Paul S Chan; Philip G Jones; Carole Decker; Donna M Buchanan; Harlan M Krumholz; P Michael Ho; John A Spertus Journal: Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes Date: 2011-07
Authors: Philippe Gabriel Steg; Robert J Goldberg; Joel M Gore; Keith A A Fox; Kim A Eagle; Marcus D Flather; Immad Sadiq; Rachel Kasper; Sophie K Rushton-Mellor; Frederick A Anderson Journal: Am J Cardiol Date: 2002-08-15 Impact factor: 2.778
Authors: Saihari Sadanandan; Christopher P Cannon; C Michael Gibson; Sabina A Murphy; Peter M DiBattiste; Eugene Braunwald Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2004-08-18 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: David Brieger; Maros Elsik; Joel M Gore; Elias Knobel; Amit Nussbacher; Leopoldo S Piegas; Jeanna Allegrone; Frederick A Anderson; Alvaro Avezum Journal: EuroIntervention Date: 2007-02 Impact factor: 6.534
Authors: Wilson Ko; Robert Tranbaugh; Jonathan D Marmur; Phyllis G Supino; Jeffrey S Borer Journal: J Am Heart Assoc Date: 2012-04-24 Impact factor: 5.501
Authors: Charles V Pollack; W Frank Peacock; Durgesh D Bhandary; Steven H Silber; Narinder Bhalla; Sunil V Rao; Deborah B Diercks; Alex Frost; Sripal Bangalore; John F Heitner; Charles Johnson; Renato DeRita; Naeem D Khan Journal: Crit Pathw Cardiol Date: 2020-12