Gulati Martha, Patel Samir, Jaffe Allan S, Joseph Anthony J, Calvin James E
Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
Am J Cardiol. 2004 Oct 1;94(7):873-8. doi: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2004.06.021.
We compared the predictive value of the Rush score with the Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) risk score in unselected patients with an acute coronary syndrome and evaluated the effect of compliance with established guidelines on the accuracy of these models. The Registry of Acute Coronary Syndromes is a retrospective registry of 3,754 consecutive patients (38% women; mean age 67 years) who presented with acute coronary syndrome to the emergency department between April 1, 1999, and December 31, 2000, at 9 hospitals. The primary end point was death, myocardial infarction, or urgent revascularization during hospitalization. Rush classification was based on quartiles of predicted risk of cardiac complication (<2% for class I vs >15% for class IV). The TIMI score was implemented as published. Compliance with guidelines for acute coronary syndrome was assessed with a 4-point scale based on the aggregate use of aspirin, beta blockers, heparin, and glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors. Fifteen percent of patients met the primary end point. The primary end point rates for TIMI scores 0/1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6/7 were 11%, 14%, 13%, 11%, 14%, and 12%, respectively (p = NS). The primary end point rates for Rush classes I, II, III, and IV were 6%, 8%, 9%, and 17%, respectively (p <0.001). After controlling for compliance with established guidelines, the odds ratio of an event increased by 46% for each unit increase in Rush score (p <0.001). After adjusting for the Rush score, the odds ratio decreased by 54% for each unit increase in compliance (p <0.001). Thus, compliance with current American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association guidelines significantly improves prognosis, regardless of the risk score. The use of established risk scores may overestimate event rates in unselected populations.
我们比较了Rush评分与心肌梗死溶栓(TIMI)风险评分在未经选择的急性冠脉综合征患者中的预测价值,并评估了遵循既定指南对这些模型准确性的影响。急性冠脉综合征注册研究是一项回顾性注册研究,纳入了1999年4月1日至2000年12月31日期间在9家医院急诊科就诊的3754例连续急性冠脉综合征患者(38%为女性;平均年龄67岁)。主要终点是住院期间的死亡、心肌梗死或紧急血运重建。Rush分类基于心脏并发症预测风险的四分位数(I类<2%,IV类>15%)。TIMI评分按已发表的方法实施。根据阿司匹林、β受体阻滞剂、肝素和糖蛋白IIb/IIIa抑制剂的综合使用情况,采用4分制评估对急性冠脉综合征指南的遵循情况。15%的患者达到主要终点。TIMI评分0/1、2、3、4、5和6/7的主要终点发生率分别为11%、14%、13%、11%、14%和12%(p=无显著性差异)。Rush I、II、III和IV类的主要终点发生率分别为6%、8%、9%和17%(p<0.001)。在控制对既定指南的遵循情况后,Rush评分每增加一个单位,事件的比值比增加46%(p<0.001)。在调整Rush评分后,遵循情况每增加一个单位,比值比降低54%(p<0.001)。因此,无论风险评分如何,遵循当前美国心脏病学会/美国心脏协会指南均可显著改善预后。使用既定风险评分可能会高估未经选择人群中的事件发生率。