Why the study?
The study investigated the relationship between the Naples prognostic score and 1-year poor clinical outcomes in patients presenting with NSTEMI.
Does a high Naples Prognostic Score predict 1-year major cardiovascular events in patients with NSTEMI undergoing successful PCI?
Does a high Naples Prognostic Score predict 1-year major cardiovascular events in patients with NSTEMI undergoing successful PCI?
NPS may aid post-PCI risk stratification in NSTEMI; leaves open validation against standard scores in larger cohorts.
Aims: This study investigated the relationship between Naples prognostic score (NPS) and 1-year poor clinical outcomes in patients presenting with non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI). Methods: The study included 121 patients who had NSTEMI and received successful PCI treatment. The researchers calculated NPS using the neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio, lymphocyte/monocyte ratio, serum albumin level, and total cholesterol. The patients were divided into two groups based on their NPS scores: those with scores of 0.1 and 2 and those with scores of 3 and 4. The study compared the occurrence of major cardiovascular events (MACE) such as 1-year all-cause mortality, 1-year nonfatal recurrent MI, and stroke between the two groups. Results: Patients with high NPS scores were observed to have significantly higher all-cause mortality than those with low NPS scores (23.9% vs. 9.3%, p=0.029). When the MACEs of the patients were compared, significantly higher MACE was observed in the high NPS group (39.1% vs. 18.7%, p=0.013). In multivariate logistic regression analysis, creatinine (OR:4,914, CI 95%: 1.310-18,433, p=0.018) and NPS 3-4 (OR:2.565, CI 95%: 1.093-6.017, p=0.030) were independent predictors of MACE. Conclusion: Composite MACEs of non-fatal recurrent MI, cerebrovascular accident, and all-cause death were higher at one year in patients with high NPS who underwent successful percutaneous intervention. High NPS is an indicator of MACE.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Akgümüş et al. (2023) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: