Why the study?
The CatLet score was recently developed to assist in risk-stratification of CAD patients by accommodating coronary anatomy variability, but validation of this system was lacking.
Does the CatLet score improve outcome prediction compared to the SYNTAX score in patients with AMI undergoing primary PCI?
Does the CatLet score improve outcome prediction compared to the SYNTAX score in patients with AMI undergoing primary PCI?
The CatLet score provides improved risk stratification and outcome prediction compared to the SYNTAX score in patients with AMI undergoing primary PCI.
CatLet score aids AMI risk stratification; leaves open prospective validation before clinical adoption.
BACKGROUND: The Coronary Artery Tree description and Lesion EvaluaTion (CatLet) score accommodating the variability in coronary anatomy is a recently developed and comprehensive angiographic scoring system aimed at assisting in risk-stratification of patients with coronary artery disease. However, a validation of this angiographic scoring system is lacking. METHODS: The CatLet score was calculated retrospectively in 308 consecutively enrolled patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention. The primary endpoint, major adverse cardiac or cerebrovascular events (MACCEs), was stratified according to CatLet tertiles: CatLetlow ≤14 (n = 124), CatLetmid 15-21 (n = 82) and CatLettop ≥22 (n = 102). RESULTS: The CatLet score alone or after adjusting for a broad spectrum of risk factors, significantly predicted clinical outcomes at a median 4.3-year follow-up. Multivariable-adjusted hazard ratios (95%CI)/unit higher score were 1.05 (1.04-1.07) for MACCE, 1.06 (1.04-1.07) for cardiac death, and 1.05 (1.04-1.07) for all-cause death. When compared to the SYNTAX score, improved discrimination and better calibration of this CatLet score resulted in a significantly refined risk stratification. The overall category-free net reclassification improvement afforded by this CatLet score was as follows: 37.2% (p = .008) for MACCEs, 35.5% (p = .0249) for cardiac death, and 31.8% (p = .0316) for all-cause death. CONCLUSIONS: The ability to integrate the variability in coronary anatomy into angiographic scoring makes the CatLet score a more specific tool for outcome predictions in AMI. (http://www.chictr.org.cn. Unique identifiers: ChiCTR-POC-17013536).
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Xu et al. (2020) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: