Value of community-derived risk models for stratifying patients with non-ST elevation acute coronary syndromes
2005; Oxford University Press; Volume: 26; Issue: 9 Linguagem: Inglês
10.1093/eurheartj/ehi214
ISSN1522-9645
AutoresCheuk‐Kit Wong, Harvey D. White,
Tópico(s)Antiplatelet Therapy and Cardiovascular Diseases
ResumoThis editorial refers to ‘TIMI, PURSUIT, and GRACE risk scores: sustained prognostic value and interaction with revascularization in NSTE-ACS’† by P. de Araujo Goncalves et al. , on page 865 In their paper, de Araujo Goncalves et al. 1 from Portugal compared three risk-stratification algorithms—the Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) score,2 the Platelet Glycoprotein IIb/IIIa in Unstable Angina: Receptor Suppression Using Integrilin Therapy (PURSUIT) score,3 and the Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events (GRACE) score4 in predicting 1-year outcome in 460 consecutive patients aged 63.4±10.8 presenting with non-ST elevation acute coronary syndromes (NSTE‐ACS). Predictive accuracy of each risk score was fair to good for death or myocardial infarction (MI) at 1-year, which occurred in 15.4% of patients (including 32 deaths and 49 MIs) with the C index ranging from 0.585 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.539–0.631] with the TIMI score, to 0.630 (95% CI 0.584–0.674) with the PURSUIT score, and 0.715 (95% CI 0.672–0.756) with the GRACE score. Of interest in this paper is the fact that the GRACE score algorithm (a score based on a community registry) performed better than the score algorithms derived for 30-day outcomes from trials (the TIMI and PURSUIT scores). Table 1 of their paper summarizes the algorithms for the calculation of these three scores. The fact that the investigators used a computer programme available from the GRACE project website to calculate the GRACE … *Corresponding author. Tel: +64 9 630 992; fax: +64 9 630 9915. E-mail address : harveyw{at}adhb.govt.nz
Referência(s)