Diagnostic Ability of Risk Models in the Field of Ischemic Stroke for Predicting Atherosclerotic Outcomes in Patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction.

IF 3 2区 医学 Q2 PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE
Hiroki Goto, Yuichi Saito, Hiroaki Yaginuma, Kazunari Asada, Takanori Sato, Osamu Hashimoto, Hideki Kitahara, Yoshio Kobayashi
{"title":"Diagnostic Ability of Risk Models in the Field of Ischemic Stroke for Predicting Atherosclerotic Outcomes in Patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction.","authors":"Hiroki Goto, Yuichi Saito, Hiroaki Yaginuma, Kazunari Asada, Takanori Sato, Osamu Hashimoto, Hideki Kitahara, Yoshio Kobayashi","doi":"10.5551/jat.65162","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>Several risk-scoring models, including the Fukuoka Stroke Risk Score, Essen Stroke Risk Score, and Stroke Prognosis Instrument II, have been developed to predict recurrent cerebrovascular events in patients with ischemic stroke. As myocardial infarction (MI) and ischemic stroke are both atherosclerotic diseases, these scoring models in the field of cerebrovascular disease may be applicable and useful for risk stratification in patients with acute MI. We therefore evaluated the diagnostic ability and clinical applicability of these stroke risk scores in predicting atherosclerotic events after acute MI.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This multicenter retrospective study included 2016 patients with acute MI who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention and survived to discharge. The three risk-scoring models were calculated, and their diagnostic ability for major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) after discharge, a composite of cardiovascular death, recurrent MI, and ischemic stroke, was evaluated.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>During the median follow-up of 523 days, 218 (10.8%) patients experienced MACE after discharge. High values for Fukuoka Stroke Risk Score, Essen Stroke Risk Score, and Stroke Prognosis Instrument II were progressively associated with an increased risk of MACE after discharge. Overall, the diagnostic abilities of the three risk scores were similar.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Risk prediction models in the field of ischemic stroke, including the Fukuoka Stroke Risk Score, Essen Stroke Risk Score, and Stroke Prognosis Instrument II, were useful in stratifying MACE risk in patients with acute MI. Risk-scoring models for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease may be applicable to patient populations with other cardiovascular diseases in different arterial territories.</p>","PeriodicalId":15128,"journal":{"name":"Journal of atherosclerosis and thrombosis","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of atherosclerosis and thrombosis","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5551/jat.65162","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aims: Several risk-scoring models, including the Fukuoka Stroke Risk Score, Essen Stroke Risk Score, and Stroke Prognosis Instrument II, have been developed to predict recurrent cerebrovascular events in patients with ischemic stroke. As myocardial infarction (MI) and ischemic stroke are both atherosclerotic diseases, these scoring models in the field of cerebrovascular disease may be applicable and useful for risk stratification in patients with acute MI. We therefore evaluated the diagnostic ability and clinical applicability of these stroke risk scores in predicting atherosclerotic events after acute MI.

Methods: This multicenter retrospective study included 2016 patients with acute MI who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention and survived to discharge. The three risk-scoring models were calculated, and their diagnostic ability for major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) after discharge, a composite of cardiovascular death, recurrent MI, and ischemic stroke, was evaluated.

Results: During the median follow-up of 523 days, 218 (10.8%) patients experienced MACE after discharge. High values for Fukuoka Stroke Risk Score, Essen Stroke Risk Score, and Stroke Prognosis Instrument II were progressively associated with an increased risk of MACE after discharge. Overall, the diagnostic abilities of the three risk scores were similar.

Conclusions: Risk prediction models in the field of ischemic stroke, including the Fukuoka Stroke Risk Score, Essen Stroke Risk Score, and Stroke Prognosis Instrument II, were useful in stratifying MACE risk in patients with acute MI. Risk-scoring models for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease may be applicable to patient populations with other cardiovascular diseases in different arterial territories.

缺血性卒中风险模型在预测急性心肌梗死患者动脉粥样硬化预后方面的诊断能力
目的:几种风险评分模型,包括Fukuoka卒中风险评分、Essen卒中风险评分和卒中预后工具II,已被开发用于预测缺血性卒中患者的复发性脑血管事件。由于心肌梗死(MI)和缺血性脑卒中都是动脉粥样硬化性疾病,这些脑血管疾病领域的评分模型可能适用于急性心肌梗死患者的风险分层,因此我们评估了这些卒中风险评分在预测急性心肌梗死后动脉粥样硬化事件中的诊断能力和临床适用性。这项多中心回顾性研究纳入了2016例经皮冠状动脉介入治疗并存活至出院的急性心肌梗死患者。计算三种风险评分模型,并评估其对出院后主要心血管不良事件(MACE)、心血管死亡、复发性心肌梗死和缺血性卒中的诊断能力。结果:中位随访523天,218例(10.8%)患者出院后出现MACE。福冈卒中风险评分、埃森卒中风险评分和卒中预后工具II的高值与出院后MACE风险的增加逐渐相关。总的来说,三个风险评分的诊断能力是相似的。结论:缺血性卒中领域的风险预测模型,包括Fukuoka卒中风险评分、Essen卒中风险评分和卒中预后工具II,对急性心肌梗死患者的MACE风险分层有用。动脉粥样硬化性心血管疾病的风险评分模型可能适用于不同动脉区域的其他心血管疾病患者群体。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.60
自引率
15.90%
发文量
271
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: JAT publishes articles focused on all aspects of research on atherosclerosis, vascular biology, thrombosis, lipid and metabolism.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信