Asada Kazunari, Saito Yuichi, Goto Hiroki, Yaginuma Hiroaki, Sato Takanori, Hashimoto Osamu, Kitahara Hideki, Kobayashi Yoshio
Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Chiba University Graduate School of Medicine, Chiba 260-8670, Japan.
Department of Cardiology, Chiba Emergency and Psychiatric Medical Center, Chiba 261-0024, Japan.
J Clin Med. 2024 Apr 24;13(9):2501. doi: 10.3390/jcm13092501.
We previously developed a risk-scoring system for heart failure (HF) in patients with acute myocardial infarction (MI), namely "HF time-points (HFTPs)". In the original HFTPs, the presence of HF on admission, during hospitalization, and at short-term follow-up was individually scored. This study examined whether the revised HFTPs, with additional scoring of previous HF, provide better predictivity. This multicenter registry included a total of 1331 patients with acute MI undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. HF was evaluated at four time-points before and after acute MI onset: (1) a history of HF; (2) elevated natriuretic peptide levels on admission; (3) in-hospital HF events; and (4) elevated natriuretic peptide levels at a median of 31 days after the onset. When HF was present at each time-point, one point was assigned to a risk scoring system, namely the original and revised HFTPs, ranging from 0 to 3 and from 0 to 4. The primary endpoint was a composite of cardiovascular death and HF rehospitalization after discharge. Of the 1331 patients, 65 (4.9%) had the primary outcome events during a median follow-up period of 507 (interquartile range, 335-1106) days. The increase in both original and revised HFTPs was associated with an increased risk of the primary outcomes in a stepwise fashion with similar diagnostic ability. The original and revised HFTPs were both predictive of long-term HF-related outcomes in patients with acute MI undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. Yet, the original HFTPs may be sufficient to estimate HF risks after MI.
我们之前为急性心肌梗死(MI)患者开发了一种心力衰竭(HF)风险评分系统,即“HF时间点(HFTPs)”。在最初的HFTPs中,分别对入院时、住院期间和短期随访时的HF情况进行评分。本研究检验了对既往HF进行额外评分的修订版HFTPs是否具有更好的预测性。这项多中心注册研究共纳入了1331例接受经皮冠状动脉介入治疗的急性MI患者。在急性MI发作前后的四个时间点对HF进行评估:(1)HF病史;(2)入院时利钠肽水平升高;(3)住院期间的HF事件;(4)发作后中位31天时利钠肽水平升高。当每个时间点存在HF时,在一个风险评分系统(即最初版和修订版HFTPs)中给予1分,评分范围分别为0至3分和0至4分。主要终点是出院后心血管死亡和HF再次住院的复合终点。在1331例患者中,65例(4.9%)在中位随访期507天(四分位间距,335 - 1106天)内发生了主要结局事件。最初版和修订版HFTPs的增加均与主要结局风险的逐步增加相关,且诊断能力相似。最初版和修订版HFTPs均能预测接受经皮冠状动脉介入治疗的急性MI患者的长期HF相关结局。然而,最初版HFTPs可能足以估计MI后的HF风险。