CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

ASCVD Prevention

Abstract

Recommended Article

How Far We Have Come, How Far We Have Yet to Go in Atherosclerosis Research Can Biomarkers of Myocardial Injury Provide Complementary Information to Coronary Imaging? From Subclinical Atherosclerosis to Plaque Progression and Acute Coronary Events Association of Sustained Blood Pressure Control with Multimorbidity Progression Among Older Adults Adenosine and adenosine receptor-mediated action in coronary microcirculation SR-B1 Drives Endothelial Cell LDL Transcytosis via DOCK4 to Promote Atherosclerosis Effect of Evolocumab on Complex Coronary Disease Requiring Revascularization Polygenic Scores to Assess Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease Risk: Clinical Perspectives and Basic Implications

Original ResearchVolume 74, Issue 7, August 2019

JOURNAL:J Am Coll Cardiol. Article Link

Predicting Major Adverse Events in Patients With Acute Myocardial Infarction

T Nestelberger, J Boeddinghaus, the APACE Investigators et al. Keywords: acute myocardial infarction; clinical assessment; electrocardiography; high-sensitivity cardiac troponin; major adverse cardiac events

ABSTRACT


BACKGROUND- Early and accurate detection of short-term major adverse cardiac events (MACE) in patients with suspected acute myocardial infarction (AMI) is an unmet clinical need.

 

OBJECTIVES - The goal of this study was to test the hypothesis that adding clinical judgment and electrocardiogram findings to the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) high-sensitivity cardiac troponin (hs-cTn) measurement at presentation and after 1 h (ESC hs-cTn 0/1 h algorithm) would further improve its performance to predict MACE.

 

METHODS- Patients presenting to an emergency department with suspected AMI were enrolled in a prospective, multicenter diagnostic study. The primary endpoint was MACE, including all-cause death, cardiac arrest, AMI, cardiogenic shock, sustained ventricular arrhythmia, and high-grade atrioventricular block within 30 days including index events. The secondary endpoint was MACE + unstable angina (UA) receiving early (≤24 h) revascularization.

 

RESULTS- Among 3,123 patients, the ESC hs-cTnT 0/1 h algorithm triaged significantly more patients toward rule-out compared with the extended algorithm (60%; 95% CI: 59% to 62% vs. 45%; 95% CI: 43% to 46%; p < 0.001), while maintaining similar 30-day MACE rates (0.6%; 95% CI: 0.3% to 1.1% vs. 0.4%; 95% CI: 0.1% to 0.9%; p = 0.429), resulting in a similar negative predictive value (99.4%; 95% CI: 98.9% to 99.6% vs. 99.6%; 95% CI: 99.2% to 99.8%; p = 0.097). The ESC hs-cTnT 0/1 h algorithm ruled-in fewer patients (16%; 95% CI: 14.9% to 17.5% vs. 26%; 95% CI: 24.2% to 27.2%; p < 0.001) compared with the extended algorithm, albeit with a higher positive predictive value (76.6%; 95% CI: 72.8% to 80.1% vs. 59%; 95% CI: 55.5% to 62.3%; p < 0.001). For 30-day MACE + UA, the ESC hs-cTnT 0/1 h algorithm had a higher positive predictive value for rule-in, whereas the extended algorithm had a higher negative predictive value for the rule-out. Similar findings emerged when using hs-cTn I.

 

CONCLUSIONS - The ESC hs-cTn 0/1 h algorithm better balanced efficacy and safety in the prediction of MACE, whereas the extended algorithm is the preferred option for the rule-out of 30-day MACE + UA. (Advantageous Predictors of Acute Coronary Syndromes Evaluation [APACE]; NCT00470587).