ArticlePloS one2025
ACEF score as a predictor of new-onset atrial fibrillation in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction: A retrospective cohort study.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundNew-onset atrial fibrillation (NOAF) during acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) is common and linked to adverse outcomes. This study aimed to assess the predictive value of the age-creatinine-ejection fraction (ACEF) score for NOAF in STEMI patients.
methodsWe retrospectively analyzed 951 STEMI patients who underwent primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) at out tertiary center between 2020 and 2023. Patients with prior atrial fibrillation (AF), AF on admission, cardiogenic shock, heart failure, significant valvular disease, or failed PCI were excluded. Clinical, laboratory, and echocardiographic data were collected, and ACEF scores were calculated. NOAF was defined as any AF episode during hospitalization in patients without prior AF. The optimal ACEF cutoff was determined using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis (Youden's index), and multivariate logistic regression identified independent predictors of NOAF.
resultsNOAF occurred in 63 patients (6.6%). These patients were older, more often female, and had lower systolic blood pressure, lower left ventricular ejection fraction, and higher C-reactive protein and creatinine levels (all p < 0.05). In-hospital major adverse cardiac events (MACE) and mortality were significantly higher in the NOAF group than patients in without NOAF group (22.2% vs. 6.2%, and 15.9% vs. 4.3%, respectively; p < 0.001). The ACEF score was significantly higher in patients with NOAF (1.73 ± 0.74 vs. 1.42 ± 0.64, p < 0.001). ROC analysis showed an area under curve (AUC) of 0.643 (95% CI: 0.571-0.715; p < 0.001). An ACEF score ≥1.32 predicted NOAF with 73% sensitivity and 55.6% specificity. In multivariate analysis, ACEF remained an independent predictor of NOAF (OR ~1.5, p = 0.02), but among its components, only age was independently associated with NOAF (OR ~1.03 per year, p = 0.01).
conclusionsThe ACEF score modestly predicts NOAF in STEMI patients, but its predictive power only incremental to age alone. Further studies are warranted for this field.
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.