Department of Cardiology, Gødstrup Hospital, Herning, Denmark; Department of Clinical Medicine, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark.
Department of Health Science and Technology, Aalborg University, Aalborg, Denmark.
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2022 Nov 22;80(21):1965-1977. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2022.08.805.
In patients with suspected obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD), the risk factor-weighted clinical likelihood (RF-CL) model and the coronary artery calcium score-weighted clinical likelihood (CACS-CL) model improves the identification of obstructive CAD compared with basic pretest probability (PTP) models.
The aim of this study was to assess the prognostic value of the new models.
The incidences of myocardial infarction and death were stratified according to categories by the RF-CL and CACS-CL and compared with categories by the PTP model. We used cohorts from a Danish register (n = 41,177) and a North American randomized study (n = 3,952). All patients were symptomatic and were referred for diagnostic testing because of clinical indications.
Despite substantial down-reclassification of patients to a likelihood ≤5% of CAD with either the RF-CL (45%) or CACS-CL (60%) models compared with the PTP (18%), the annualized event rates of myocardial infarction and death were low using all 3 models; RF-CL 0.51% (95% CI: 0.46-0.56), CACS-CL 0.48% (95% CI: 0.44-0.56), and PTP 0.37% (95% CI: 0.31-0.44), respectively. Overall, comparison of the predictive power of the 3 models using Harrell's C-statistics demonstrated superiority of the RF-CL (0.64 [95% CI: 0.63-0.65]) and CACS-CL (0.69 [95% CI: 0.67-0.70]) compared with the PTP model (0.61 [95% CI: 0.60-0.62]).
The simple clinical likelihood models that include classical risk factors or risk factors combined with CACS provide improved risk stratification for myocardial infarction and death compared with the standard PTP model. Hence, the optimized RF-CL and CACS-CL models identify 2.5 and 3.3 times more patients, respectively, who may not benefit from further diagnostic testing.
在疑似阻塞性冠状动脉疾病(CAD)的患者中,风险因素加权临床可能性(RF-CL)模型和冠状动脉钙评分加权临床可能性(CACS-CL)模型与基本的术前概率(PTP)模型相比,可提高对阻塞性 CAD 的识别能力。
本研究旨在评估这些新模型的预后价值。
根据 RF-CL 和 CACS-CL 对类别进行分层,并将类别与 PTP 模型进行比较,以确定心肌梗死和死亡的发生率。我们使用了来自丹麦登记处(n=41177)和北美随机研究(n=3952)的队列。所有患者均有症状,并因临床指征而接受诊断性检查。
与 PTP 模型(18%)相比,RF-CL(45%)或 CACS-CL(60%)模型将患者的可能性降至 CAD 可能性≤5%的比例显著降低,但所有 3 种模型的心肌梗死和死亡的年化发生率均较低;RF-CL 为 0.51%(95%CI:0.46-0.56),CACS-CL 为 0.48%(95%CI:0.44-0.56),PTP 为 0.37%(95%CI:0.31-0.44)。总体而言,使用 Harrell 的 C 统计量比较 3 种模型的预测能力表明,RF-CL(0.64 [95%CI:0.63-0.65])和 CACS-CL(0.69 [95%CI:0.67-0.70])优于 PTP 模型(0.61 [95%CI:0.60-0.62])。
包含传统风险因素或风险因素与 CACS 相结合的简单临床可能性模型,与标准的 PTP 模型相比,可更好地对心肌梗死和死亡进行风险分层。因此,优化后的 RF-CL 和 CACS-CL 模型分别可识别出多 2.5 倍和 3.3 倍的患者,他们可能无需进一步进行诊断性检查。