Suppr超能文献

使用 HEART、GRACE 和 TIMI 评分以及单次当代肌钙蛋白结果对急诊科胸痛患者进行风险分层,以预测主要不良心脏事件。

Risk stratifying chest pain patients in the emergency department using HEART, GRACE and TIMI scores, with a single contemporary troponin result, to predict major adverse cardiac events.

机构信息

Aberdeen Royal Infirmary, Emergency Department, Aberdeen, UK.

School of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK.

出版信息

Emerg Med J. 2018 Jul;35(7):420-427. doi: 10.1136/emermed-2017-207172. Epub 2018 Apr 5.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

The majority of patients presenting to the ED with cardiac sounding chest pain have a non-diagnostic ECG and the problem of differentiating those suffering an acute coronary syndrome from those without is familiar to all ED clinical staff. To stratify risk in these patients, specific scores have been developed. Recent work has focused on incorporating newer high-sensitivity cardiac troponin (hs-cTn) assays; however, issues regarding performance and availability of these assays remain.

AIM

Prospectively compare HEART, Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events (GRACE) and Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) scores, using a single contemporary cTn at admission, to predict a major adverse cardiac event (MACE) at 30 days.

METHOD

Prospective observational cohort study performed in a UK tertiary hospital in patients with suspected cardiac chest pain and no significant ST elevation on initial ECG. Data collection took place 2 December 2014 to 8 February 2016. The treating clinician recorded risk score data real time and a single contemporary cTn taken at presentation was used in score calculation. The primary endpoint was 30-day MACE. C-statistic was determined for each score and diagnostic characteristics of high-risk and low-risk cut-offs were calculated.

RESULTS

189/1000 patients in the study developed a 30-day MACE. The c-statistic of HEART for 30-day MACE (0.87 (95% CI 0.84 to 0.90)) was higher than TIMI (0.78 (95% CI 0.74 to 0.81)) and GRACE (0.74 (95% CI 0.70 to 0.78)).HEART score ≤3 identified low-risk patients with sensitivity 99.5% (95% CI 97.1% to 99.9%) and negative predictive value (NPV) 99.6% (95% CI 97.3% to 99.9%) exceeding TIMI 0 (sensitivity 97.4% (95% CI 93.9% to 99.1%) and NPV 97.8% (95% CI 94.8% to 99.1%)) and GRACE score 0-55 (sensitivity 95.2% (95% CI 91.1% to 97.8%) and NPV 95.8% (95% CI 92.2% to 97.7%)).

CONCLUSION

HEART outperformed both TIMI and GRACE in overall discriminative capacity for 30-day MACE. Using a single contemporary cTn at presentation, a HEART score of ≤3 demonstrated sensitivity and NPV of ≥99.5% for 30-day MACE. These results reach the threshold for a safe discharge strategy but should be interpreted thoughtfully in light of other work.

摘要

背景

大多数因心脏性胸痛就诊于急诊科的患者心电图无诊断性改变,所有急诊科临床医生都熟悉如何区分那些患有急性冠状动脉综合征和无急性冠状动脉综合征的患者。为了对这些患者进行风险分层,已经开发了特定的评分。最近的研究集中在纳入新的高敏肌钙蛋白(hs-cTn)检测上;然而,这些检测的性能和可用性仍然存在问题。

目的

前瞻性比较 HEART、全球急性冠状动脉事件登记(GRACE)和心肌梗死溶栓(TIMI)评分,使用入院时的单次即时 cTn 预测 30 天内的主要不良心脏事件(MACE)。

方法

在英国一家三级医院进行的疑似心脏胸痛且初始心电图无明显 ST 段抬高的患者的前瞻性观察性队列研究。数据收集于 2014 年 12 月 2 日至 2016 年 2 月 8 日。治疗医生实时记录风险评分数据,入院时采集的单次即时 cTn 用于评分计算。主要终点为 30 天的 MACE。计算每个评分的 C 统计量,并计算高危和低危截断值的诊断特征。

结果

1000 例患者中有 189 例(18.9%)在研究期间发生了 30 天的 MACE。HEART 评分预测 30 天 MACE 的 C 统计量(0.87(95%CI 0.84 至 0.90))高于 TIMI(0.78(95%CI 0.74 至 0.81))和 GRACE(0.74(95%CI 0.70 至 0.78))。HEART 评分≤3 可识别低危患者,其敏感性为 99.5%(95%CI 97.1%至 99.9%),阴性预测值(NPV)为 99.6%(95%CI 97.3%至 99.9%),高于 TIMI 0(敏感性 97.4%(95%CI 93.9%至 99.1%),NPV 97.8%(95%CI 94.8%至 99.1%))和 GRACE 评分 0-55(敏感性 95.2%(95%CI 91.1%至 97.8%),NPV 95.8%(95%CI 92.2%至 97.7%))。

结论

HEART 在总体预测 30 天 MACE 的能力方面优于 TIMI 和 GRACE。使用入院时的单次即时 cTn,HEART 评分≤3 对 30 天 MACE 的敏感性和 NPV 均≥99.5%。这些结果达到了安全出院策略的阈值,但应根据其他研究进行谨慎解释。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验