Key result
TIMI and HEART scores outperform GRACE for predicting MACE in ED patients with acute chest pain.
Why the study?
The study aimed to compare the predictive values of the TIMI, HEART, and GRACE scoring systems for major adverse cardiovascular events in emergency department patients with acute chest pain.
Does risk stratification using TIMI or HEART scoring systems improve prediction of major adverse cardiovascular events compared to the GRACE score in acute chest pain patients admitted to the emergency department?
Meta-Analysis
Does risk stratification using TIMI or HEART scoring systems improve prediction of major adverse cardiovascular events compared to the GRACE score in acute chest pain patients admitted to the emergency department?
TIMI and HEART scoring systems demonstrate superior predictive value for major adverse cardiovascular events compared to the GRACE score in patients presenting to the emergency department with acute chest pain.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Supports preferring TIMI or HEART over GRACE for ED chest pain risk stratification; confirms superiority via pooled diagnostic performance.
Ke et al. (2021) conducted a meta-analysis in Acute chest pain. TIMI and HEART scoring systems vs. GRACE scoring system was evaluated on Major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs). TIMI and HEART scoring systems were superior to GRACE for predicting major adverse cardiovascular events in emergency department patients with acute chest pain (AUC 0.80 and 0.80 vs 0.70).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: