Cargando…

An analysis of patients receiving emergency CAG without PCI and the value of GRACE score in predicting PCI possibilities in NSTE-ACS patients

BACKGROUND: There are patients who underwent emergency coronary angiography (CAG) but did not receive percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). The aim of this study was to analyze these reasons. METHODS: This is a single-center retrospective study. We recruited 201 consecutive patients who received...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Zhou, Bo-Da, Zu, Ling-Yun, Mi, Lin, Wang, Gui-Song, Guo, Li-Jun, Gao, Wei
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Science Press 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4460167/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26089848
http://dx.doi.org/10.11909/j.issn.1671-5411.2015.03.008
_version_ 1782375335429406720
author Zhou, Bo-Da
Zu, Ling-Yun
Mi, Lin
Wang, Gui-Song
Guo, Li-Jun
Gao, Wei
author_facet Zhou, Bo-Da
Zu, Ling-Yun
Mi, Lin
Wang, Gui-Song
Guo, Li-Jun
Gao, Wei
author_sort Zhou, Bo-Da
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: There are patients who underwent emergency coronary angiography (CAG) but did not receive percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). The aim of this study was to analyze these reasons. METHODS: This is a single-center retrospective study. We recruited 201 consecutive patients who received emergency CAG but did not receive PCI. To investigate the value of the Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events (GRACE) score in predicting PCI possibilities in non-ST segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS) patients, we recruited 80 consecutive patients who presented with NSTE-ACS and received emergency CAG as well as emergency PCI. RESULTS: Among the 201 patients who received emergency CAG but did not receive PCI, 26% patients had final diagnosis other than coronary heart disease. In the patients with significant coronary artery stenosis, 23 patients (11.5%) were recommended to coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), one patient (0.5%) refused PCI; 13 patients (6.5%) with significant thrombus burden were treated with glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor antagonist; 74 patients (36.8%) were treated with drug therapy because no severe stenosis (> 70%) was present in the crime vessel. Moreover, 80 of the 201 patients were presented with NSTE-ACS (excluding those patients with final diagnosis other than coronary heart disease, excluding those patients planned for CABG treatment), referred as non PCI NSTE-ACS. When comparing their GRACE scores with 80 consecutive patients presented with NSTE-ACS who received emergency CAG as well as emergency PCI (referred as PCI NSTE-ACS), we found that PCI NSTE-ACS patients had significantly higher GRACE scores compared with non PCI NSTE-ACS patients. We then used Receiver Operator Characteristic Curve (ROC) to test whether the GRACE score is good at evaluating the possibilities of PCI in NSTE-ACS patients. The area under the curve was 0.854 ± 0.030 (P < 0.001), indicating good predictive value. Furthermore, we analyzed results derived from ROC statistics, and found that a GRACE score of 125.5, as a cut-off, has high sensitivity and specificity in evaluating PCI possibilities in NSTE-ACS patients. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings indicate that the GRACE score has predictive value in determining whether NSTE-ACS patients would receive PCI.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4460167
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher Science Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-44601672015-06-18 An analysis of patients receiving emergency CAG without PCI and the value of GRACE score in predicting PCI possibilities in NSTE-ACS patients Zhou, Bo-Da Zu, Ling-Yun Mi, Lin Wang, Gui-Song Guo, Li-Jun Gao, Wei J Geriatr Cardiol Research Article BACKGROUND: There are patients who underwent emergency coronary angiography (CAG) but did not receive percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). The aim of this study was to analyze these reasons. METHODS: This is a single-center retrospective study. We recruited 201 consecutive patients who received emergency CAG but did not receive PCI. To investigate the value of the Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events (GRACE) score in predicting PCI possibilities in non-ST segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS) patients, we recruited 80 consecutive patients who presented with NSTE-ACS and received emergency CAG as well as emergency PCI. RESULTS: Among the 201 patients who received emergency CAG but did not receive PCI, 26% patients had final diagnosis other than coronary heart disease. In the patients with significant coronary artery stenosis, 23 patients (11.5%) were recommended to coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), one patient (0.5%) refused PCI; 13 patients (6.5%) with significant thrombus burden were treated with glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor antagonist; 74 patients (36.8%) were treated with drug therapy because no severe stenosis (> 70%) was present in the crime vessel. Moreover, 80 of the 201 patients were presented with NSTE-ACS (excluding those patients with final diagnosis other than coronary heart disease, excluding those patients planned for CABG treatment), referred as non PCI NSTE-ACS. When comparing their GRACE scores with 80 consecutive patients presented with NSTE-ACS who received emergency CAG as well as emergency PCI (referred as PCI NSTE-ACS), we found that PCI NSTE-ACS patients had significantly higher GRACE scores compared with non PCI NSTE-ACS patients. We then used Receiver Operator Characteristic Curve (ROC) to test whether the GRACE score is good at evaluating the possibilities of PCI in NSTE-ACS patients. The area under the curve was 0.854 ± 0.030 (P < 0.001), indicating good predictive value. Furthermore, we analyzed results derived from ROC statistics, and found that a GRACE score of 125.5, as a cut-off, has high sensitivity and specificity in evaluating PCI possibilities in NSTE-ACS patients. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings indicate that the GRACE score has predictive value in determining whether NSTE-ACS patients would receive PCI. Science Press 2015-05 /pmc/articles/PMC4460167/ /pubmed/26089848 http://dx.doi.org/10.11909/j.issn.1671-5411.2015.03.008 Text en Institute of Geriatric Cardiology http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License, which allows readers to alter, transform, or build upon the article and then distribute the resulting work under the same or similar license to this one. The work must be attributed back to the original author and commercial use is not permitted without specific permission.
spellingShingle Research Article
Zhou, Bo-Da
Zu, Ling-Yun
Mi, Lin
Wang, Gui-Song
Guo, Li-Jun
Gao, Wei
An analysis of patients receiving emergency CAG without PCI and the value of GRACE score in predicting PCI possibilities in NSTE-ACS patients
title An analysis of patients receiving emergency CAG without PCI and the value of GRACE score in predicting PCI possibilities in NSTE-ACS patients
title_full An analysis of patients receiving emergency CAG without PCI and the value of GRACE score in predicting PCI possibilities in NSTE-ACS patients
title_fullStr An analysis of patients receiving emergency CAG without PCI and the value of GRACE score in predicting PCI possibilities in NSTE-ACS patients
title_full_unstemmed An analysis of patients receiving emergency CAG without PCI and the value of GRACE score in predicting PCI possibilities in NSTE-ACS patients
title_short An analysis of patients receiving emergency CAG without PCI and the value of GRACE score in predicting PCI possibilities in NSTE-ACS patients
title_sort analysis of patients receiving emergency cag without pci and the value of grace score in predicting pci possibilities in nste-acs patients
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4460167/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26089848
http://dx.doi.org/10.11909/j.issn.1671-5411.2015.03.008
work_keys_str_mv AT zhouboda ananalysisofpatientsreceivingemergencycagwithoutpciandthevalueofgracescoreinpredictingpcipossibilitiesinnsteacspatients
AT zulingyun ananalysisofpatientsreceivingemergencycagwithoutpciandthevalueofgracescoreinpredictingpcipossibilitiesinnsteacspatients
AT milin ananalysisofpatientsreceivingemergencycagwithoutpciandthevalueofgracescoreinpredictingpcipossibilitiesinnsteacspatients
AT wangguisong ananalysisofpatientsreceivingemergencycagwithoutpciandthevalueofgracescoreinpredictingpcipossibilitiesinnsteacspatients
AT guolijun ananalysisofpatientsreceivingemergencycagwithoutpciandthevalueofgracescoreinpredictingpcipossibilitiesinnsteacspatients
AT gaowei ananalysisofpatientsreceivingemergencycagwithoutpciandthevalueofgracescoreinpredictingpcipossibilitiesinnsteacspatients
AT zhouboda analysisofpatientsreceivingemergencycagwithoutpciandthevalueofgracescoreinpredictingpcipossibilitiesinnsteacspatients
AT zulingyun analysisofpatientsreceivingemergencycagwithoutpciandthevalueofgracescoreinpredictingpcipossibilitiesinnsteacspatients
AT milin analysisofpatientsreceivingemergencycagwithoutpciandthevalueofgracescoreinpredictingpcipossibilitiesinnsteacspatients
AT wangguisong analysisofpatientsreceivingemergencycagwithoutpciandthevalueofgracescoreinpredictingpcipossibilitiesinnsteacspatients
AT guolijun analysisofpatientsreceivingemergencycagwithoutpciandthevalueofgracescoreinpredictingpcipossibilitiesinnsteacspatients
AT gaowei analysisofpatientsreceivingemergencycagwithoutpciandthevalueofgracescoreinpredictingpcipossibilitiesinnsteacspatients