Key result
GRACE 2.0 outperforms TIMI in predicting 1-year MACE among Indian patients with NSTEMI.
Why the study?
While risk stratification is essential in NSTEMI, the validation of existing risk scores in developing countries like India remains limited.
Which risk score (PURSUIT, HEART, TIMI, GRACE 2.0, or CAMI-NSTEMI) has the highest predictive accuracy for MACE in NSTEMI patients?
Observational (n=1,012)
No
Which risk score (PURSUIT, HEART, TIMI, GRACE 2.0, or CAMI-NSTEMI) has the highest predictive accuracy for MACE in NSTEMI patients?
In an Indian NSTEMI cohort, the TIMI score best predicted in-hospital MACE, whereas the GRACE 2.0 score was superior for predicting intermediate to long-term outcomes up to 1 year.
May support preferring GRACE 2.0 over TIMI for 1-year risk stratification in Indian NSTEMI; leaves open prospective validation.
Risk stratification is essential in managing patients with non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI). While multiple risk scores exist, their validation in developing countries like India remains limited. This study compares the predictive accuracy of the PURSUIT, HEART, TIMI, GRACE 2.0, and CAMI-NSTEMI scores for major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), including death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, emergency percutaneous coronary intervention, and coronary artery bypass grafting, in NSTEMI patients. This was a single-center prospective observational study wherein patients diagnosed with NSTEMI were enrolled. Detailed clinical histories, including symptomatology and risk factors, were recorded. Five risk scores (TIMI, GRACE 2.0, PURSUIT, HEART, and CAMI-NSTEMI scores) were computed. Outcomes were assessed for in-hospital, 14-day, six-month, and one-year MACE. A total of 1102 patients were enrolled, with a mean age of 59.6±11.2 years. MACE occurred in 140 patients (12.7%), with 89 deaths (8.1%). Patients with MACE were older and more likely to smoke or have hypertension, diabetes, or stroke. Multivariate logistic regression analysis identified angina in the last 48 hours, diabetes, smoking, cardiac arrest, and fragmented QRS on electrocardiogram as independent MACE predictors. TIMI showed the highest predictive ability for in-hospital MACE, while GRACE excelled for 14-day, 6-month, and 1-year outcomes. All risk scores effectively predicted short- and intermediate-term MACE, with GRACE performing best for longer-term predictions.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sharma et al. (2025) conducted an observational in Non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) (n=1,012). Risk scores (TIMI, GRACE 2.0, PURSUIT, HEART, CAMI-NSTEMI) was evaluated on Major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) defined as a composite of all-cause mortality, non-fatal recurrent myocardial infarction, target-vessel revascularization, or stroke. The GRACE 2.0 risk score demonstrated superior predictive ability for major adverse cardiovascular events at one year compared to the TIMI score (p=0.002) in Indian patients with NSTEMI.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: