Key result
Lower Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index links to increased MACE risk in ACS patients undergoing PCI.
Why the study?
The association between the geriatric nutritional risk index (GNRI) and major adverse cardiovascular events in patients with ACS undergoing PCI remained uncertain.
Does a lower Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index (GNRI) predict an increased risk of major adverse cardiovascular events in patients with acute coronary syndrome undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention?
Does a lower Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index (GNRI) predict an increased risk of major adverse cardiovascular events in patients with acute coronary syndrome undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention?
The Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index serves as a valid prognostic indicator for predicting major adverse cardiovascular events in ACS patients undergoing PCI.
May support GNRI for post-PCI risk stratification in ACS; leaves open whether nutritional interventions reduce MACEs.
Background and Aims The geriatric nutritional risk index (GNRI) has shown good predictive value for some diseases. However, its association with major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) in acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) remains uncertain. This study investigated the correlation between the GNRI and MACEs. Patients and Methods This was a prospective cohort study. We consecutively enrolled 1515 ACS patients who underwent PCI. The median duration of follow‐up was 1000 days. The primary endpoints were MACEs, including all‐cause mortality, severe heart failure rehospitalization, revascularization, acute myocardial infarction (AMI) recurrence, and restenosis/intrastent thrombosis. Results ROC curve analysis revealed an area under the curve of 0.603, with a GNRI cutoff value of 110.78. Cox regression analysis indicated that lower GNRI levels were independently associated with an increased risk of MACEs, a finding supported by risk score assessments. Kaplan–Meier survival curves and log‐rank tests indicated significantly lower cumulative survival rates in patients with lower GNRI value. Lower GNRI levels were also correlated with a higher risk of rehospitalization and cardiovascular death, as confirmed by the competing risk model. These associations remained significant after adjustments (all p for interaction > 0.05). RCS analysis and trend tests (all p < 0.05) further supported these findings. Conclusion GNRI, as an indicator of nutritional status, was correlated with the risk of MACEs in ACS patients undergoing PCI, particularly in predicting cardiac death and rehospitalization, suggesting that the GNRI level may serve as a valid indicator for predicting poor prognosis in patients with ACS undergoing PCI.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Qi et al. (2026) studied this question. Lower Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index levels were associated with an increased risk of major adverse cardiovascular events in ACS patients undergoing PCI.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: