Why the study?
To identify existing comorbidity measures and summarise their association with outcomes following acute coronary syndrome.
Does higher comorbidity burden predict worse outcomes in patients with acute coronary syndrome?
Does higher comorbidity burden predict worse outcomes in patients with acute coronary syndrome?
Higher comorbidity scores, particularly the Charlson comorbidity index, are associated with increased mortality risk in patients with acute coronary syndrome and add prognostic value to existing clinical risk scores.
Comorbidity measures may refine ACS prognostication; leaves open which index best informs clinical decisions.
AIM: To identify existing comorbidity measures and summarise their association with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) outcomes. METHODS: We searched published studies from MEDLINE (OVIDSP) and EMBASE from inception to March 2021, studies of the pre-specified conference proceedings from Web of Science since May 2017, and studies included in any relevant systematic reviews. Studies that reported no comorbidity measures, no association of comorbid burden with ACS outcomes, or only used a comorbidity measure as a confounder without further information were excluded. After independent screening by three reviewers, data extraction and risk of bias assessment of each included study was undertaken. Results were narratively synthesised. RESULTS: Of 4166 potentially eligible studies identified, 12 (combined n = 6 885 982 participants) were included. Most studies had a high risk of bias at quality assessment. Six different types of comorbidity measures were identified with the Charlson comorbidity index (CCI) the most widely used measure among studies. Overall, the greater the comorbid burden or the higher comorbidity scores recorded, the greater was the association with the risk of mortality. CONCLUSION: The review summarised different comorbidity measures and reported that higher comorbidity scores were associated with worse ACS outcomes. The CCI is the most widely measure of comorbid burden and shows additive value to clinical risk scores in use.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Zhang et al. (2021) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: