Department of Cardiology, Russell's Hall Hospital, Dudley Group NHS Foundation Trust, UK.
Department of Perioperative and Critical Care Management, Graduate School of Biomedical and Health Sciences, Hiroshima University (JP), Japan.
Int J Cardiol. 2024 Dec 15;417:132529. doi: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2024.132529. Epub 2024 Sep 6.
CHA2DS2-VASc score is used to assess thromboembolic risk in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF)/atrial flutter (AFL), however its utilization to predict outcomes and readmission at following discharge in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) regardless of AF/AFL presence is understudied. We sought to assess its utility in predicting outcomes, length of hospital stay (LOS), and healthcare-associated costs (HAC) in these patients.
The National Readmission Database (NRD) was queried from 2010 to 2017 for patients with/without AF/AFL undergoing CABG using the International Classification of Diseases, Ninth and Tenth editions (ICD-9-&-10). Multiple regression analysis and multivariate analysis using Cox-Hazard analysis were used to evaluate outcomes up to 90-day readmission from discharge, LOS, and HAC against CHADS-VASc score (cut-off-score:6) were abstracted from the database.
Of the 420,458 patients that underwent CABG, 76,859 (18.3 %) were re-admitted to hospital within 90-days from discharge. Statistically significant increase in 90-day all-cause readmissions were demonstrated with increasing CHADS-VASc score [No AF/AFL vs AF/AFL: score-0 (2.4 % vs1.4 %), score-6 (3.1 % vs 4.5 %, p-value<0.0001]. Similar trends were seen in re-admissions for TIA/Stroke and heart failure. The survival rate for all events were lower with incremental increase in CHADS-VASc score (score-0 = 100 %; score-6 = 73 %, p-value<0.0001). Greater LOS and HAC was associated with increasing higher CHADS-VASc score (standardized-beta[β]; no AF/AFL vs AF/AFL: LOS = score-1: 0.08 vs 0.06, score-6: 0.12 vs 0.13. HAC = score-1: 0.02 vs 0.009, score-6: 0.02 vs 0.01, p-value <0.001).
CHADS-VASc score is an easy-to-use tool that predicts poorer outcomes, higher readmission, longer LOS, higher HAC, not just in patients with AF/AFL undergoing CABG, but also in those without AF/AFL.
CHA2DS2-VASc 评分用于评估房颤(AF)/房扑(AFL)患者的血栓栓塞风险,但在接受冠状动脉旁路移植术(CABG)的患者中,无论是否存在 AF/AFL,该评分用于预测出院后结局和再入院的应用仍研究不足。我们旨在评估其在预测这些患者结局、住院时间(LOS)和医疗保健相关成本(HAC)方面的效用。
使用国际疾病分类第 9 版和第 10 版(ICD-9-和-10),从 2010 年至 2017 年,在国家再入院数据库(NRD)中查询了接受 CABG 治疗的有/无 AF/AFL 的患者。使用多变量回归分析和 Cox-Hazard 分析对出院后 90 天内的再入院、LOS 和 HAC 等结局进行评估,将 CHADS-VASc 评分(临界值:6)从数据库中提取出来。
在接受 CABG 的 420458 例患者中,76859 例(18.3%)在出院后 90 天内再次住院。随着 CHADS-VASc 评分的增加,90 天全因再入院率显著增加[无 AF/AFL 与有 AF/AFL:评分-0(2.4%与 1.4%),评分-6(3.1%与 4.5%,p 值<0.0001]。TIA/中风和心力衰竭再入院也呈现出相似的趋势。随着 CHADS-VASc 评分的增加,所有事件的生存率逐渐下降(评分-0=100%;评分-6=73%,p 值<0.0001)。较高的 LOS 和 HAC 与较高的 CHADS-VASc 评分相关(标准化β[β];无 AF/AFL 与有 AF/AFL:LOS 评分-1:0.08 与 0.06,评分-6:0.12 与 0.13。HAC 评分-1:0.02 与 0.009,评分-6:0.02 与 0.01,p 值<0.001)。
CHADS-VASc 评分是一种简单易用的工具,不仅可以预测 AF/AFL 患者 CABG 后的不良结局、更高的再入院率、更长的 LOS 和更高的 HAC,还可以预测无 AF/AFL 患者的不良结局、更高的再入院率、更长的 LOS 和更高的 HAC。