Literature DB >> 9217616

Development and validation of a clinical score to estimate the probability of coronary artery disease in men and women presenting with suspected coronary disease.

A P Morise1, W J Haddad, D Beckner.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Guidelines for the management of patients with suspected coronary disease have emphasized stratification into groups with low, intermediate, and high probability of significant coronary disease. Previously derived clinical prediction rules have been difficult to apply in clinical settings. The purpose of this study was to develop and validate a clinical score that facilitates this stratification process. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of prospectively acquired data from 915 patients with suspected coronary disease and normal resting electrocardiograms who presented for exercise testing at a university hospital. All patients subsequently underwent coronary angiography. Analysis included logistic regression with significant coronary disease (> or = 1 vessel with a > or = 50% lesion) presence as the dependent variable and clinical variables as independent variables. From this analysis, a coronary disease score was developed to estimate prevalence of coronary disease from clinical variables. Validation of this score was performed in a separate prospectively acquired cohort of 348 patients.
RESULTS: For the entire validation group, the prevalence of significant coronary disease was 16% (10/63) in the low probability group, 44% (86/195) in the intermediate probability group, and 69% (62/90) in the high probability group. Both men and women were stratified equally well into the 3 probability groups.
CONCLUSION: The clinical score is an easily memorized and accurate method for categorizing patients with suspected but not proven coronary disease and normal resting electrocardiograms into clinically meaningful probability groups upon which decisions concerning appropriate diagnostic test selection could potentially be based.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1997        PMID: 9217616     DOI: 10.1016/s0002-9343(97)00086-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Med        ISSN: 0002-9343            Impact factor:   4.965


  58 in total

1.  Prognostic value of CT coronary angiography: focus on obstructive vs. nonobstructive disease and on the presence of left main disease.

Authors:  E Maffei; S Seitun; C Martini; A Aldrovandi; T Arcadi; A Clemente; G Messalli; R Malagò; A Weustink; N Mollet; K Nieman; D Ardissino; P de Feyter; G Krestin; F Cademartiri
Journal:  Radiol Med       Date:  2010-10-06       Impact factor: 3.469

2.  Prognostic value of computed tomography coronary angiography in patients with chest pain of suspected cardiac origin.

Authors:  E Maffei; S Seitun; C Martini; A Aldrovandi; G Cervellin; C Tedeschi; A Guaricci; G Messalli; O Catalano; F Cademartiri
Journal:  Radiol Med       Date:  2011-03-07       Impact factor: 3.469

3.  The absence of coronary calcification does not exclude obstructive coronary artery disease or the need for revascularization in patients referred for conventional coronary angiography.

Authors:  Ilan Gottlieb; Julie M Miller; Armin Arbab-Zadeh; Marc Dewey; Melvin E Clouse; Leonardo Sara; Hiroyuki Niinuma; David E Bush; Narinder Paul; Andrea L Vavere; John Texter; Jeffery Brinker; João A C Lima; Carlos E Rochitte
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2010-02-16       Impact factor: 24.094

4.  A pretest prognostic score to assess patients undergoing exercise or pharmacological stress testing.

Authors:  Anthony Morise; Matthew Evans; Farrukh Jalisi; Rajendra Shetty; Marc Stauffer
Journal:  Heart       Date:  2007-02       Impact factor: 5.994

5.  Difference of coronary artery disease severity, extent and plaque characteristics between patients with hypertension, diabetes mellitus or dyslipidemia.

Authors:  Nobuo Tomizawa; Takeshi Nojo; Shinichi Inoh; Sunao Nakamura
Journal:  Int J Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2014-09-28       Impact factor: 2.357

6.  Downstream procedures and outcomes after stress testing for chest pain without known coronary artery disease in the United States.

Authors:  Daniel W Mudrick; Patricia A Cowper; Bimal R Shah; Manesh R Patel; Neil C Jensen; Eric D Peterson; Pamela S Douglas
Journal:  Am Heart J       Date:  2012-03       Impact factor: 4.749

7.  Incremental prognostic value of coronary artery calcium score versus CT angiography among symptomatic patients without known coronary artery disease.

Authors:  Edward Hulten; Marcio Sommer Bittencourt; Brian Ghoshhajra; Daniel O'Leary; Mitalee P Christman; Michael J Blaha; Quynh Truong; Kyle Nelson; Philip Montana; Michael Steigner; Frank Rybicki; Jon Hainer; Thomas J Brady; Udo Hoffmann; Marcelo F Di Carli; Khurram Nasir; Suhny Abbara; Ron Blankstein
Journal:  Atherosclerosis       Date:  2014-01-08       Impact factor: 5.162

8.  Interaction of impaired coronary flow reserve and cardiomyocyte injury on adverse cardiovascular outcomes in patients without overt coronary artery disease.

Authors:  Viviany R Taqueti; Brendan M Everett; Venkatesh L Murthy; Mariya Gaber; Courtney R Foster; Jon Hainer; Ron Blankstein; Sharmila Dorbala; Marcelo F Di Carli
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2014-12-05       Impact factor: 29.690

9.  Incremental value of the CT coronary calcium score for the prediction of coronary artery disease.

Authors:  Tessa S S Genders; Francesca Pugliese; Nico R Mollet; W Bob Meijboom; Annick C Weustink; Carlos A G van Mieghem; Pim J de Feyter; M G Myriam Hunink
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2010-06-18       Impact factor: 5.315

10.  Ruling out coronary heart disease in primary care patients with chest pain: a clinical prediction score.

Authors:  Baris Gencer; Paul Vaucher; Lilli Herzig; François Verdon; Christiane Ruffieux; Stefan Bösner; Bernard Burnand; Thomas Bischoff; Norbert Donner-Banzhoff; Bernard Favrat
Journal:  BMC Med       Date:  2010-01-21       Impact factor: 8.775

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.