Background There are patients who underwent emergency coronary angiography （CAG） but did not receive percutaneous coronary intervention （PCI）. The aim of this study was to analyze these reasons. Methods This is a ...Background There are patients who underwent emergency coronary angiography （CAG） but did not receive percutaneous coronary intervention （PCI）. The aim of this study was to analyze these reasons. Methods This is a single-center retrospective study. We recruited 201 consecutive patients who received emergency CAG but did not receive PCI. To investigate the value of the Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events （GRACE） score in predicting PC1 possibilities in non-ST segment elevation acute coronary syndrome （NSTE-ACS） pa- tients, we recruited 80 consecutive patients who presented with NSTE-ACS and received emergency CAG as well as emergency PC1. Re- sults Among the 201 patients who received emergency CAG but did not receive PCI, 26% patients had final diagnosis other than coronary heart disease. In the patients with significant coronary artery stenosis, 23 patients （11.5%） were recommended to coronary artery bypass grafting （CABG）, one patient （0.5%） refused PCI; 13 patients （6.5%） with significant thrombus burden were treated with glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor antagonist; 74 patients （36.8%） were treated with drug therapy because no severe stenosis （〉 70%） was present in the crime vessel. Moreover, 80 of the 201 patients were presented with NSTE-ACS （excluding those patients with final diagnosis other than coronary heart disease, excluding those patients planned for CABG treatment）, referred as non PCI NSTE-ACS. When comparing their GRACE scores with 80 consecutive patients presented with NSTE-ACS who received emergency CAG as well as emergency PCI （referred as PCI NSTE-ACS）, we found that PCI NSTE-ACS patients had significantly higher GRACE scores compared with non PCI NSTE-ACS patients. We then used Receiver Operator Characteristic Curve （ROC） to test whether the GRACE score is good at evaluating the possibilities of PCI in NSTE-ACS patients. The area under the curve was 0.854 ~ 0.030 （P 〈 0.001）, indicating good predictive value. Furthermore, we analyzed results derived from ROC statistics, and found that a GRACE score of 125.5, as a cut-off, has high sensitivity and specificity in evaluating PCI possibilities in NSTE-ACS patients. Conclusions Our findings indicate that the GRACE score has predictive value in determining whether NSTE-ACS patients would receive PCI.展开更多
基金The study was supported by grants from the National Natural Science Foundation of China （No. 81300076, 81400833）, Beijing Natural Science Foundation （No. 7132195） and Discovery Cardiovascular Research Grant, Chinese Medical Doctor Association （No. DFCMDA201306）.
文摘Background There are patients who underwent emergency coronary angiography （CAG） but did not receive percutaneous coronary intervention （PCI）. The aim of this study was to analyze these reasons. Methods This is a single-center retrospective study. We recruited 201 consecutive patients who received emergency CAG but did not receive PCI. To investigate the value of the Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events （GRACE） score in predicting PC1 possibilities in non-ST segment elevation acute coronary syndrome （NSTE-ACS） pa- tients, we recruited 80 consecutive patients who presented with NSTE-ACS and received emergency CAG as well as emergency PC1. Re- sults Among the 201 patients who received emergency CAG but did not receive PCI, 26% patients had final diagnosis other than coronary heart disease. In the patients with significant coronary artery stenosis, 23 patients （11.5%） were recommended to coronary artery bypass grafting （CABG）, one patient （0.5%） refused PCI; 13 patients （6.5%） with significant thrombus burden were treated with glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor antagonist; 74 patients （36.8%） were treated with drug therapy because no severe stenosis （〉 70%） was present in the crime vessel. Moreover, 80 of the 201 patients were presented with NSTE-ACS （excluding those patients with final diagnosis other than coronary heart disease, excluding those patients planned for CABG treatment）, referred as non PCI NSTE-ACS. When comparing their GRACE scores with 80 consecutive patients presented with NSTE-ACS who received emergency CAG as well as emergency PCI （referred as PCI NSTE-ACS）, we found that PCI NSTE-ACS patients had significantly higher GRACE scores compared with non PCI NSTE-ACS patients. We then used Receiver Operator Characteristic Curve （ROC） to test whether the GRACE score is good at evaluating the possibilities of PCI in NSTE-ACS patients. The area under the curve was 0.854 ~ 0.030 （P 〈 0.001）, indicating good predictive value. Furthermore, we analyzed results derived from ROC statistics, and found that a GRACE score of 125.5, as a cut-off, has high sensitivity and specificity in evaluating PCI possibilities in NSTE-ACS patients. Conclusions Our findings indicate that the GRACE score has predictive value in determining whether NSTE-ACS patients would receive PCI.
