4.6 Article

CHA2DS2-VASc score and clinical outcomes of patients with acute coronary syndrome

Journal

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF INTERNAL MEDICINE
Volume 36, Issue -, Pages 57-61

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejim.2016.09.010

Keywords

Acute coronary syndrome; Risk score; mortality

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: The CHA2DS2-VASc score has been recommended for the assessment of thromboembolic risk in patients with atrial fibrillation. Hypothesis: The CHA2DS2-VASc score may be associated with adverse outcomes in patients with ACS. Methods: Included were patients with ACS enrolled in the Acute Coronary Syndrome Israeli biennial Surveys (ACSIS) during 2000-2013. Patients were divided into 4 groups according to their CHA2DS2-VASc score (0 or 1, 2 or 3, 4 or 5, and >5). The primary endpoint was 1-year all-cause mortality. Results: The 13,422 patients had a mean age of 63.5 +/- 13 years and included 25.8% females. Higher CHA2DS2-VASc score was associated with a significant increase in 1-year mortality. Patients with a CHA2DS2-VASc score >5 had the highest 1-year mortality risk that was 6-fold higher compared to patients with a score of 0 to 1 (hazard ratio = 6, 95% CI = 4.1-8.8, p < 0.0001). However, even an intermediate CHA2DS2-VASc score of 2-3 was associated with a significant 2.6-fold increase in 1-year mortality. Patients with a higher CHA2DS2-VASc score were less frequently selected for an invasive strategy with an early coronary angiogram and subsequent angioplasty and were less commonly treated with the guideline-based medications. However, differences in outcomes remained significant following a multivariate analysis suggesting that these variations in therapy can only partially explain the differences in outcomes. Conclusions: Higher CHA2DS2-VASc score identifies high-risk patients that may be overlooked by existing scores. Further studies are needed in order to evaluate whether the CHA2DS2-VASc score may be used together with the GRACE score for an improved risk assessment of ACS patients. (C) 2016 Published by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of European Federation of Internal Medicine.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available