Why the study?
Early risk stratification has relevant implications for individualized management, but the prognostic performance of CHA2DS2-VASc versus GRACE risk models needed assessment in patients with AF and ACS or PCI.
Do CHA2DS2-VASc and GRACE scores accurately predict long-term ischemic events and mortality in patients with AF and ACS or undergoing PCI?
Do CHA2DS2-VASc and GRACE scores accurately predict long-term ischemic events and mortality in patients with AF and ACS or undergoing PCI?
Both CHA2DS2-VASc and GRACE at discharge scores are independently associated with an increased risk of MACCEs in patients with AF and ACS or PCI, with the GRACE at discharge score performing better for predicting all-cause mortality.
May support MACCE risk stratification with either score in AF-ACS/PCI; extends validation data but remains hypothesis-generating.
Background: Early risk stratification of patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and acute coronary syndrome (ACS) or undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) has relevant implication for individualized management strategies. The CHA2DS2-VASc and GRACE ACS risk model are well-established risk stratification systems. We aimed to assess their prognostic performance in AF patients with ACS or PCI. Methods: Consecutive patients with AF and ACS or referred for PCI were prospectively recruited and followed up for 3 years. The primary endpoint was major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCEs), including cardiovascular mortality, myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, systemic embolism and ischemia-driven revascularization. Results: Higher CHA2DS2-VASc (HR [hazard ratio] 1.184, 95% CI 1.091–1.284) and GRACE at discharge score (HR 1.009, 95% CI 1.004–1.014) were independently associated with increased risk of MACCEs. The CHA2DS2-VASc (c-statistics: 0.677) and GRACE at discharge (c-statistics: 0.699) demonstrated comparable discriminative capacity for MACCEs (p = 0.281) while GRACE at admission provided relatively lower discrimination (c-statistics: 0.629, p vs. CHA2DS2-VASc = 0.041). For predicting all-cause mortality, three models displayed good discriminative capacity (c-statistics: 0.750 for CHA2DS2-VASc, 0.775 for GRACE at admission, 0.846 for GRACE at discharge). A significant discrimination improvement of GRACE at discharge compared to CHA2DS2-VASc was detected (NRI = 45.13%). Conclusions: In the setting of coexistence of AF and ACS or PCI, CHA2DS2-VASc and GRACE at discharge score were independently associated with an increased risk of MACCEs. The GRACE at discharge performed better in predicting all-cause mortality.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Mo et al. (2022) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: