Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23703934›Full record

ArticleCatheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions2013

Comparison of six risk scores in patients with triple vessel coronary artery disease undergoing PCI: competing factors influence mortality, myocardial infarction, and target lesion revascularization.

Jason C Kovacic, Atul M Limaye, Samantha Sartori, Paul Lee, Roshan Patel, Sweta Chandela, Biana Trost, Swathi Roy, Rafael Harari, Birju Narechania and 9 more

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Observational
  12. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

19 authors.

Jason C KovacicCardiovascular Institute, Mount Sinai Medical Center, New York, New York.
Atul M Limaye
Samantha Sartori
Paul Lee
Roshan Patel
Sweta Chandela
Biana Trost
Swathi Roy
Rafael Harari
Birju Narechania
Rucha Karajgikar
Michael C Kim
Prakash Krishnan
Pedro Moreno
Usman Baber
Roxana Mehran
George Dangas
Annapoorna S Kini
Samin K Sharma

Funding

Cellular and molecular mechanisms of endothelial repair and atherosclerosisK08HL111330 · NHLBI · ICAHN SCHOOL OF MEDICINE AT MOUNT SINAI · PI KOVACIC, JASON CIRIL · 2012 to 2016
$647k
NHLBI NIH HHS K08 HL111330
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo compare the discriminatory value of differing risk scores for predicting clinical outcomes following PCI in routine practice.

backgroundVarious risk scores predict outcomes after PCI. However, these scores consider markedly different factors, from purely anatomical (SYNTAX risk score [SRS]) to purely clinical (ACEF, modified ACEF [ACEFmod], NCDR), while other scores combine both elements (Clinical SYNTAX score [CSS], NY State Risk Score [NYSRS]).

methodsPatients with triple vessel and/or LM disease with 12 month follow-up were studied from a single center PCI registry. Exclusion criteria included STEMI presentation, prior revascularization and shock. Clinical events at 12 months were compared to baseline risk scores, according to score tertiles and area under receiver-operating-characteristic curves (AUC).

resultsWe identified 584 eligible patients (69.8±12.3yrs, 405 males). All scores were predictive of mortality, with the SRS being least predictive (AUC=0.66). The most accurate scores for mortality were the CSS and ACEF (AUC=0.76 for both: P = 0.019 and 0.08 vs. SRS, respectively). For TLR, while the SRS trended toward being positively predictive (P = 0.075), several scores trended towards a negative association, which reached significance for the NCDR (P = 0.045). The SRS and CSS were the only scores predictive of MI (both P < 0.05). No score was particularly accurate for predicting MACE (death+MI+TLR), with AUCs ranging from 0.53 (NCDR) to 0.63 (SRS).

conclusionsCompeting factors influence mortality, MI and TLR after PCI. An increasing burden of comorbidities is associated with mortality, whereas anatomical complexity predicts MI. By combining these outcomes to predict MACE, all scores show reduced utility.

Indexed as

Decision Support TechniquesAgedAged, 80 and overArea Under CurveComorbidityCoronary Artery DiseaseFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedMyocardial InfarctionNew York CityPatient SelectionPercutaneous Coronary InterventionPredictive Value of TestsRegistriesatherosclerosiscoronary artery diseaserisk scorestenting

Identifiers

PMID23703934
PMCPMC4155404

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.