Sérgio Barra1, Rui Providência2,3,4, Luís Paiva3, Inês Almeida3, Francisca Caetano3, Paulo Dinis3, António Leitão Marques3. 1. Cardiology Department, Papworth Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Papworth Everard, Cambridge CB23 3RE, UK. 2. Cardiology Department, Clinique Pasteur, Toulouse, France. 3. Cardiology Department, Coimbra's Hospital and University Centre, Coimbra, Portugal. 4. Faculty of Medicine, University of Coimbra, Coimbra, Portugal.
Abstract
Background: We hypothesize that the discriminative performance of GRACE, ACHTUNG-Rule, CHADS2 or CHA2DS2-VASc may be lower in patients with a Myocardial Infarction (MI) and concurrent atrial fibrillation (AF), as none of these scores seem able to fully capture both atherothrombotic/thromboembolic risks. This study aims to evaluate the mid-term prognostic performance of these algorithms in patients with these two conditions and to analyze the utility of a score combining GRACE and CHA2DS2-VASc. Methods: Observational retrospective single-centre cohort study including 1852 patients admitted with a MI. We tested the prognostic performance of the aforementioned risk stratification schemes in patients with vs. without AF at admission or during hospitalization. Primary endpoints: a) total all-cause mortality, comprising intrahospital and post-discharge all-cause mortality; b) intrahospital all-cause mortality and c) all-cause mortality during follow-up. Furthermore, all three versions of the ACHTUNG-Rule were directly compared to their equivalent GRACE score versions, and a new score, entitled GRACE-CHA2DS2-VASc, was developed and compared with GRACE. Results: The mid-term prognostic performance of all scores was considerably lower in patients with AF, corroborating our hypothesis. The ACHTUNG-Rule seemed superior to GRACE in the prediction of post-discharge (AUC 0.790±0.032 vs. 0.685±0.038, p=0.079; integrated discrimination improvement index [IDI] of 0.166 and relative IDI of 83.7%) and total mortality (0.762±0.031 vs. 0.712±0.033, p=0.144; IDI of 0.042, relative IDI of 11.7%), but its performance decreased in those with AF as well. GRACE-CHA2DS2-VASc was only marginally superior to GRACE in discriminative performance, but detected truly low- (CHA2DS2-VASc <2; total mortality 0%) and high-risk patients (GRACE high-risk stratum, and CHA2DS2-VASc >4; total mortality 44.3%) with considerable efficacy. Conclusions: In patients with MI and concurrent AF, the GRACE, CHADS2 and CHA2DS2-VASc scores seemed less accurate in the prediction of all-cause mortality. A hypothetic GRACE-CHA2DS2-VASc score or the recently developed ACHTUNG-Rule may eventually provide a more rigorous approach to risk stratification in this high-risk setting.
Background: We hypothesize that the discriminative performance of GRACE, ACHTUNG-Rule, CHADS2 or CHA2DS2-VASc may be lower in patients with a Myocardial Infarction (MI) and concurrent atrial fibrillation (AF), as none of these scores seem able to fully capture both atherothrombotic/thromboembolic risks. This study aims to evaluate the mid-term prognostic performance of these algorithms in patients with these two conditions and to analyze the utility of a score combining GRACE and CHA2DS2-VASc. Methods: Observational retrospective single-centre cohort study including 1852 patients admitted with a MI. We tested the prognostic performance of the aforementioned risk stratification schemes in patients with vs. without AF at admission or during hospitalization. Primary endpoints: a) total all-cause mortality, comprising intrahospital and post-discharge all-cause mortality; b) intrahospital all-cause mortality and c) all-cause mortality during follow-up. Furthermore, all three versions of the ACHTUNG-Rule were directly compared to their equivalent GRACE score versions, and a new score, entitled GRACE-CHA2DS2-VASc, was developed and compared with GRACE. Results: The mid-term prognostic performance of all scores was considerably lower in patients with AF, corroborating our hypothesis. The ACHTUNG-Rule seemed superior to GRACE in the prediction of post-discharge (AUC 0.790±0.032 vs. 0.685±0.038, p=0.079; integrated discrimination improvement index [IDI] of 0.166 and relative IDI of 83.7%) and total mortality (0.762±0.031 vs. 0.712±0.033, p=0.144; IDI of 0.042, relative IDI of 11.7%), but its performance decreased in those with AF as well. GRACE-CHA2DS2-VASc was only marginally superior to GRACE in discriminative performance, but detected truly low- (CHA2DS2-VASc <2; total mortality 0%) and high-risk patients (GRACE high-risk stratum, and CHA2DS2-VASc >4; total mortality 44.3%) with considerable efficacy. Conclusions: In patients with MI and concurrent AF, the GRACE, CHADS2 and CHA2DS2-VASc scores seemed less accurate in the prediction of all-cause mortality. A hypothetic GRACE-CHA2DS2-VASc score or the recently developed ACHTUNG-Rule may eventually provide a more rigorous approach to risk stratification in this high-risk setting.
Authors: S S Rathore; A K Berger; K P Weinfurt; K A Schulman; W J Oetgen; B J Gersh; A J Solomon Journal: Circulation Date: 2000-03-07 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Lars Køber; Karl Swedberg; John J V McMurray; Marc A Pfeffer; Eric J Velazquez; Rafael Diaz; Aldo P Maggioni; Viatcheslav Mareev; Grzegorz Opolski; Frans Van de Werf; Faiez Zannad; Georg Ertl; Scott D Solomon; Steven Zelenkofske; Jean-Lucien Rouleau; Jeffrey D Leimberger; Robert M Califf Journal: Eur J Heart Fail Date: 2006-02-28 Impact factor: 15.534
Authors: W Taylor Kimberly; Ona Wu; E Murat Arsava; Priya Garg; Ruijun Ji; Mark Vangel; Aneesh B Singhal; Hakan Ay; A Gregory Sorensen Journal: Cerebrovasc Dis Extra Date: 2011-05-17