Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
http://hdl.handle.net/1942/31433
Title: | Predictive ability of ACEF and ACEF II score in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention in the GLOBAL LEADERS study | Authors: | Chichareon, Ply Modolo, Rodrigo van Klaveren, David Takahashi, Kuniaki Kogame, Norihiro Chang, Chun-Chin Katagiri, Yuki Tomaniak, Mariusz Asano, Taku Spitzer, Ernest Buszman, Pawel Prokopczuk, Janusz Fath-Ordoubadi, Farzin Buysschaert, Ian Anderson, Richard Oldroyd, Keith G. Merkely, Bela Garg, Scot Wykrzykowska, Joanna J. Piek, Jan J. Juni, Peter Hamm, Christian Steg, Philippe Gabriel Valgimigli, Marco VRANCKX, Pascal Windecker, Stephan Onuma, Yoshinobu Serruys, Patrick W. |
Issue Date: | 2019 | Publisher: | ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD | Source: | International journal of cardiology (print), 286 , p. 43 -50 | Abstract: | Background: ACEF score has been shown to have predictive ability in the patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). The ACEF II score has recently been developed to predict short-term mortality after cardiac surgery. We compared the predictive ability of the ACEF and ACEF II scores to predict mortality after PCI in the all-comers population. Methods: The ACEF and ACEF II scores were calculated in 15,968 patients enrolled in the GLOBAL LEADERS study. Discrimination and calibration were assessed for outcomes after PCI. Recalibration of the regression model by updating the intercept and slope were performed to adjust the original ACEF model to the PCI setting. In a stratified approach, patients were divided into quintiles according to the score. Outcomes were compared between quintiles. Results: The ACEF and ACEF II score were available in 14,941 and 14,355 patients respectively. Discrimination for 30-day all-cause mortality was acceptable for both scores (C-statistic ACEF 0.75 and ACEF II 0.77). For 2-year all-cause mortality, the discrimination of ACEF score was acceptable (C-statistic 0.72) while the discrimination of ACEF II score was moderate (C-statistic 0.69). Both scores identified patients at high risk of mortality but overestimated all-cause mortality at 30 days in all quintiles. After recalibration, agreement between predicted and observed 30-day all-cause mortality in both scores are close to the identity line. Conclusions: The ACEF II model did not improve the predictive ability of the ACEF score. Recalibrated ACEF model can be used to estimated all-cause mortality rate at 30 days after PCI. (C) 2019 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. | Notes: | Serruys, PW (reprint author), POB 2125, NL-3000 CC Rotterdam, Netherlands. patrick.w.j.c.serruys@gmail.com |
Keywords: | ACEF; ACEF II; Mortality; Percutaneous coronary intervention; GLOBAL;LEADERS | Document URI: | http://hdl.handle.net/1942/31433 | ISSN: | 0167-5273 | e-ISSN: | 1874-1754 | DOI: | 10.1016/j.ijcard.2019.02.043 | ISI #: | WOS:000465271500011 | Category: | A1 | Type: | Journal Contribution |
Appears in Collections: | Research publications |
Files in This Item:
File | Description | Size | Format | |
---|---|---|---|---|
1-s2.0-S0167527318363150-main.pdf Restricted Access | Published version | 1.09 MB | Adobe PDF | View/Open Request a copy |
SCOPUSTM
Citations
4
checked on Sep 7, 2020
WEB OF SCIENCETM
Citations
22
checked on Sep 28, 2024
Page view(s)
26
checked on Jul 20, 2022
Download(s)
2
checked on Jul 20, 2022
Google ScholarTM
Check
Altmetric
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.