Why the study?
Do platelet-containing inflammatory indices improve prognostic discrimination for 1-year MACE compared to platelet-free indices in patients undergoing PCI?
Cohort (n=2,244)
No
Do platelet-containing inflammatory indices improve prognostic discrimination for 1-year MACE compared to platelet-free indices in patients undergoing PCI?
Complete blood count-derived inflammatory indices are associated with MACE after PCI but offer negligible incremental predictive utility over standard clinical models.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
SII adds negligible discrimination for post-PCI MACE; leaves open whether inflammatory indices merit integration into refined risk models.
Background/Objectives: Systemic inflammatory indices derived from the complete blood count differ in whether they incorporate platelet count. Whether platelet-containing indices outperform platelet-free indices and whether platelet count adds independent prognostic information remain insufficiently tested. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed 2244 consecutive patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) at a single center. The neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), systemic inflammatory response index (SIRI), systemic immune–inflammation index (SII) and pan-immune–inflammation value (PIV) were derived from the baseline blood count. The outcome was 1-year (400-day) major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs). Because SII and PIV equal NLR and SIRI multiplied by platelet count, the platelet contribution was tested with nested likelihood ratio tests. Calibration, decision-curve, 30-day landmark, time-varying coefficient and subgroup analyses were also performed. Results: MACEs occurred in 170 patients (7.6%). After adjustment, NLR, SII and PIV remained associated with MACEs. SII showed the highest C-index and lowest AIC, but no index significantly improved discrimination over the clinical model (ΔC-index +0.009, p = 0.060 for SII), no head-to-head difference was detected, and the added net benefit was negligible (0.38 per 100 patients). Adding platelet count did not improve model fit over the whole follow-up (p = 0.104 and 0.146) but did beyond the 30-day landmark (p = 0.025 and 0.033); the platelet-by-period interaction was not significant (p = 0.197). Exploratory analyses suggested larger associations in ST-segment elevation MI based on few events. Only the adjusted SII association survived within-family Holm correction; no result met the global 5% false-discovery-rate threshold. Conclusions: The four indices showed similar, modest discrimination without evidence of superiority or meaningful incremental utility; the post-30-day platelet signal was not confirmed by interaction testing and remains hypothesis-generating.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Joo et al. (2026) conducted a cohort in Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) (n=2,244). Systemic immune-inflammation index (SII) vs. Clinical model was evaluated on 1-year major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) (HR 1.26, 95% CI 1.07-1.47, p=0.016).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: