%0 Generic %A Gil, Júlio %A Abreu, Luís %A Antunes, Hugo %A Gonçalves, Maria Luísa %A Pires, Maria Inês %A Santos, Luís Ferreira dos %A Henriques, Carla %A Matos, Ana %A Cabral, José Costa %A Santos, Jorge Oliveira %D 2019 %T Application of Risks Scores in Acute Coronary Syndromes. How Does ProACS Hold Up Against Other Risks Scores? %U https://scielo.figshare.com/articles/dataset/Application_of_Risks_Scores_in_Acute_Coronary_Syndromes_How_Does_ProACS_Hold_Up_Against_Other_Risks_Scores_/9599174 %R 10.6084/m9.figshare.9599174.v1 %2 https://scielo.figshare.com/ndownloader/files/17241560 %2 https://scielo.figshare.com/ndownloader/files/17241563 %2 https://scielo.figshare.com/ndownloader/files/17241566 %2 https://scielo.figshare.com/ndownloader/files/17241569 %2 https://scielo.figshare.com/ndownloader/files/17241572 %2 https://scielo.figshare.com/ndownloader/files/17241578 %2 https://scielo.figshare.com/ndownloader/files/17241584 %2 https://scielo.figshare.com/ndownloader/files/17241587 %K Acute Coronary Syndrome/prognosis %K ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction %K Hospital Mortality, Risk Assessment/methods %K Survival Rate/methods %X

Abstract Background: Multiple risk scores (RS) are approved in the prediction of worse prognosis in acute coronary syndromes (ACS). Recently, the Portuguese Journal of Cardiology has proposed the ProACS RS. Objective: Application of several validated RS, as well as ProACS in patients, admitted for ACS. Evaluation of each RS's performance in predicting in-hospital mortality and the occurrence of all-cause mortality or non-fatal ACS at one-year follow-up and compare them to the ProACS RS. Methods: A retrospective study of ACS was performed. The following RS were applied: GRACE, ACTION Registry-GWTG, PURSUIT, TIMI, EMMACE, SRI, CHA2DS2-VASc-HS, C-ACS and ProACS. ROC Curves were created to determine the predictive power for each RS and then were directly compared to ProACS. Results: The ProACS, ACTION Registry-GWTG and GRACE showed a c-statistics of 0.908, 0.904 and 0.890 for predicting in-hospital mortality, respectively, performing better in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction patients. The other RS performed satisfactorily, with c-statistics over 0.750, apart from the CHA2DS2-VASc-HS and C-ACS which underperformed. All RS underperformed in predicting worse long-term prognosis revealing c-statistics under 0.700. Conclusion: ProACS is an easily obtained risk score for early stratification of in-hospital mortality. When evaluating all RS, the ProACS, ACTION Registry-GWTG and GRACE RS showed the best performance, demonstrating high capability of predicting a worse prognosis. ProACS was able to demonstrate statistically significant superiority when compared to almost all RS. Thus, the ProACS has showed that it is able to combine simplicity in the calculation of the score with good performance in predicting a worse prognosis.

%I SciELO journals