ArticleEuropean heart journal. Acute cardiovascular care2012
ACHTUNG-Rule: a new and improved model for prognostic assessment in myocardial infarction.
Article in European heart journal. Acute cardiovascular care, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Fibroblast Growth Factor 23 and Outcome Prediction in Patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
- Mid-term Risk Stratification of Patients with a Myocardial Infarction and Atrial Fibrillation: Beyond GRACE and CHADS.Journal of atrial fibrillation · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTHROMBOLYSIS IN MYOCARDIAL INFARCTION (TIMI), PLATELET GLYCOPROTEIN IIB/IIIA IN UNSTABLE ANGINA: Receptor Suppression Using Integrilin (PURSUIT) and Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events (GRACE) scores have been developed for risk stratification in myocardial infarction (MI). The latter is the most validated score, yet active research is ongoing for improving prognostication in MI.
aimDerivation and validation of a new model for intrahospital, post-discharge and combined/total all-cause mortality prediction - ACHTUNG-Rule - and comparison with the GRACE algorithm.
methods1091 patients admitted for MI (age 68.4 ± 13.5, 63.2% males, 41.8% acute MI with ST-segment elevation (STEMI)) and followed for 19.7 ± 6.4 months were assigned to a derivation sample. 400 patients admitted at a later date at our institution (age 68.3 ± 13.4, 62.7% males, 38.8% STEMI) and followed for a period of 7.2 ± 4.0 months were assigned to a validation sample. Three versions of the ACHTUNG-Rule were developed for the prediction of intrahospital, post-discharge and combined (intrahospital plus post-discharge) all-cause mortality prediction. All models were evaluated for their predictive performance using the area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve, calibration through the Hosmer-Lemeshow test and predictive utility within each individual patient through the Brier score. Comparison through ROC curve analysis and measures of risk reclassification - net reclassification improvement index (NRI) or Integrated Discrimination Improvement (IDI) - was performed between the ACHTUNG versions for intrahospital, post-discharge and combined mortality prediction and the equivalent GRACE score versions for intrahospital (GRACE-IH), post-discharge (GRACE-6PD) and post-admission 6-month mortality (GRACE-6).
resultsAssessment of calibration and overall performance of the ACHTUNG-Rule demonstrated a good fit (p value for the Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test of 0.258, 0.101 and 0.550 for ACHTUNG-IH, ACHTUNG-T and ACHTUNG-R, respectively) and high discriminatory power in the validation cohort for all the primary endpoints (intrahospital mortality: AUC ACHTUNG-IH 0.886 ± 0.035 vs. AUC GRACE-IH 0.906 ± 0.026; post-discharge mortality: AUC ACHTUNG-R 0.827 ± 0.036 vs. AUC GRACE-6PD 0.811 ± 0.034; combined/total mortality: AUC ACHTUNG-T 0.831 ± 0.028 vs. AUC GRACE-6 0.815 ± 0.033). Furthermore, all versions of the ACHTUNG-Rule accurately reclassified a significant number of patients in different, more appropriate, risk categories (NRI ACHTUNG-IH 17.1%, p (2-sided) = 0.0021; NRI ACHTUNG-R 22.0%, p = 0.0002; NRI ACHTUNG-T 18.6%, p = 0.0012). The prognostic performance of the ACHTUNG-Rule was similar in both derivation and validation samples.
conclusionsAll versions of the ACHTUNG-Rule have shown excellent discriminative power and good calibration for predicting intrahospital, post-discharge and combined in-hospital plus post-discharge mortality. The ACHTUNG version for intrahospital mortality prediction was not inferior to its equivalent GRACE model, and ACHTUNG versions for post-discharge and combined/total mortality demonstrated apparent superiority. External validation in wider, independent, preferably multicentre, registries is warranted before its potential clinical implementation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.