Why the study?
High mortality and morbidity in acute heart failure are partly due to mismatched treatment intensity, motivating early and accurate risk prediction through biomarkers and risk scores.
How do biomarkers and statistical risk scores compare for mortality prediction and risk stratification in patients with acute heart failure?
How do biomarkers and statistical risk scores compare for mortality prediction and risk stratification in patients with acute heart failure?
This review compares the utility of biomarkers versus statistical risk scores for early and accurate mortality prediction in acute heart failure.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
May inform tool selection for acute heart failure risk stratification; leaves open prospective validation of optimal approaches.
Acute heart failure (AHF) is a complex and heterogeneous syndrome not only associated with a concerning rise in incidence, but also with still unacceptably high rates of mortality and morbidity. As this dismal outcome is at least in part due to a mismatch between the severity of AHF and the intensity of its management, both in-hospital and immediately after discharge, early and accurate risk prediction could contribute to more effective, risk-adjusted management. Biomarkers are noninvasive and highly reproducible quantitative tools that have improved the understanding of AHF pathophysiology. They can help guide the intensity of AHF management. In addition, using a statistical model to estimate risk from a combination of several predictor variables such as vital signs or demographics has gained more and more attention over recent years. In this context, the aim of a statistical model, which gives a so-called risk score, is to help clinicians to make more standardised decisions. This review highlights recent advances and remaining uncertainties regarding risk stratification in AHF by characterising and comparing the potential of biomarkers and risk scores. .
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Wussler et al. (2020) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: