Why the study?
Which of eight risk scores best predicts cardiovascular events in NSTEMI patients with multi-vessel disease after PCI?
Which of eight risk scores best predicts cardiovascular events in NSTEMI patients with multi-vessel disease after PCI?
Risk scores incorporating clinical variables, such as SYNTAX score II and MAS, demonstrate superior prognostic ability for adverse cardiovascular events in NSTEMI patients with multi-vessel disease post-PCI.
May aid risk stratification post-PCI in NSTEMI multivessel disease; leaves open prospective validation before clinical adoption.
This study compared eight risk scores regarding their predictive ability in non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) patients ( n = 862) with multi-vessel disease (MVD) after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). The primary outcome was cardiac death. The secondary outcomes included major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE) [a composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction (MI), and unplanned repeat revascularization], all-cause death, and MI. During a median follow-up of 4.8 years, 47 (5.5%) cardiac death, 218 (25.3%) MACE, 79 (9.2%) all-cause death, and 40 (4.6%) MI were recorded. The Synergy Between PCI With Taxus and Cardiac Surgery (SYNTAX) score II was the most accurate for cardiac death with the highest area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) (0.814, 95% CI: 0.758–0.869). The logistic SYNTAX score extended model (LSS extended ) exhibited the most powerful ability in predicting MACE (AUC: 0.624, 95% CI: 0.580–0.667) and MI (AUC: 0.657, 95% CI: 0.567–0.747). The modified Age, Creatinine, and Ejection Fraction score (MAS) was the most accurate score in predicting all-cause death (AUC: 0.798, 95% CI: 0.752–0.844). The scores involving clinical variables showed better ability to predict adverse cardiovascular events among NSTEMI patients with MVD after PCI.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Wang et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: