Key result
Gender-recalibrated MECKI score modestly improves 2-year prognostic accuracy for major events versus the native score.
Why the study?
Heart failure prognostic scores lack sex-specific assessment, raising doubt about risk assessment accuracy in women given their better survival despite low peak VO2.
Does a gender re-calibrated MECKI score improve prognostic accuracy for the composite of all-cause mortality, urgent heart transplant, and LVAD implant in patients with HFrEF compared to the native MECKI score?
Population
7900 HF patients with reduced ejection fraction in the MECKI score registry
Comparison
Native vs gender re-calibrated MECKI score
Design
Retrospective registry-based cohort study
Follow-up
4.05 years [1.72-7.47]
Authors
Loading...
Gender recalibration may modestly enhance MECKI prognostication; leaves open clinical impact pending prospective validation.
Cohort (n=7,900)
Does a gender re-calibrated MECKI score improve prognostic accuracy for the composite of all-cause mortality, urgent heart transplant, and LVAD implant in patients with HFrEF compared to the native MECKI score?
Absolute Event Rate: 0.7893% vs 0.7799%
p-value: p=0.0194
Re-calibrating the MECKI score according to gender-specific differences significantly improves its prognostic accuracy for predicting mortality and advanced HF therapies in HFrEF patients.
Salvioni et al. (2023) conducted a cohort in Heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (n=7,900). Gender re-calibrated MECKI score vs. Native MECKI score was evaluated on Composite of all-cause mortality, urgent heart transplant and LVAD implant at 2 years (p=0.0194). A gender re-calibrated MECKI score improved prognostic accuracy for mortality, urgent heart transplant, and LVAD implant at 2 years compared to the native score (AUC 0.7893 vs 0.7799, p=0.0194).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: