SEARCH · PubMed Health

Results for “Risk Stratification”

Explore indexed PubMed citations for clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health research. Read source abstracts and follow each citation to its original PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 37 records · Page 2Linked to original sources

PubMed2000

Arrhythmic risk stratification of post-myocardial infarction patients.

Post-myocardial infarction risk stratification, especially arrhythmic risk stratification, is an issue that has still not been wholly addressed in modern clinical cardiology. In the past 10 years, arrhythmic risk stratification has been approached mainly by evaluating frequency and complexity of premature ventricular contractions, detected on Holter monitoring, often in association with determination of percent ejection fraction. This methodology has been proven to be limited and fallacious according to the Cardiac Arrhythmia Suppression Trial I and II (CAST I,II) results, in which suppression of premature ventricular contractions or premature ventricular beats throughout by antiarrhythmic drugs resulted in an increase in both cardiac and arrhythmic mortality. Only amiodarone as an antiarrhythmic drug, as proven in the recent European Myocardial Infarct Amiodarone Trial (EMIAT) and Canadian Amiodarone Myocardial Infarction Trial (CAMIAT), was effective in reducing arrhythmic mortality without affecting cardiac mortality, in patients selected mainly because of a reduced ejection fraction, with and without premature ventricular contractions. Conversely, it is well known that beta-blockers are effective in preventing sudden death in post-acute myocardial infarction (AMI) patients, thus reducing cardiac and arrhythmic mortality. Conversely, in other institutions, risk stratification in post-AMI patients has been performed by electrophysiologic study obtained, without any previous noninvasive arrhythmic risk stratification, in all post-AMI patients. In recent years, many other noninvasive electrocardiology parameters, such as late potentials (signal-averaged electrocardiography), heart rate variability, baroreflex sensitivity, and, more recently, T-wave alternance, have been shown to be useful, but they are associated with a low specificity in the noninvasive identification of patients at high risk for arrhythmic mortality. Conversely, in the Multicenter Automatic Defibrillation Implantation Trial (MADIT), electrophysiology confirmed that inducibility of ventricular tachycardia shows high specificity and a high predictive value for arrhythmic events. Nevertheless, the MADIT study population is not comparable to a cohort of consecutive patients who have recently had a myocardial infarction. In this setting, the highest risk of arrhythmic events can be observed in patients with depressed percent ejection fraction (< 35%) and in the first 6 months after AMI. Today, the most convincing approach seems to be the one combining both noninvasive risk stratification parameters (e.g., premature ventricular beats > 10/h or reduced heart rate variability < 70 ms or a positive signal-averaged electrocardiogram) followed by a further arrhythmic risk stratification, obtained through electrophysiologic study. Several published and ongoing trials that utilize various arrhythmic risk stratification techniques as part of their protocol are reviewed.

Amiodarone↗

PubMed2005

[Acute coronary syndromes without persistent ST-segment elevation: is risk stratification correctly applied?].

Risk stratification of patients with acute coronary syndromes is of paramount importance in achieving maximal benefit from current therapeutic modalities and for correct resource allocation. Since risk prediction based on the integration of key prognostic variables is relatively inaccurate, the clinical guidelines of the European Society of Cardiology (which have been endorsed by the Italian Federation of Cardiology) suggest an univariate approach favoring the sensitivity of the detection of high-risk patients compromising specificity. Such an approach is likely to identify a large population of high-risk patients possibly causing a mismatch between the number of patients in need of invasive evaluation and treatment, and the availability of interventional resources. Most of the risk of adverse cardiac events can be captured by the observation of three prognostic indicators: the presence of heart failure, the finding of ST-segment shifts (both elevation or depression) in the presenting electrocardiogram, and the elevation of markers of myocardial damage. The risk can be even higher in subjects who concurrently display additional risk features such as diabetes, renal insufficiency, advanced age, or previous revascularization procedures. Such patients are likely to be less treated both medically and invasively, than patients without such characteristics. The results of Italian regional registries show a favorable temporal trend toward a more a aggressive approach in such neglected high-risk subgroups.

Acute Disease↗

PubMed1996

A comparison of three techniques for rapid model development: an application in patient risk-stratification.

Accurately risk-stratifying patients is a key component of health care outcomes assessment. And, many health care organizations increasingly are relying upon automated means for assistance in making patient risk-stratification decisions. Unfortunately, the process of outcome model development, as it is currently practiced, is both time consuming and difficult. We investigated the relative abilities of three modeling techniques (logistic regression, artificial neural network (ANN), and Bayesian) to rapidly develop models for risk-stratifying patients. Our results demonstrated that all three modeling techniques perform equally well in certain situations. However, the Bayesian model with conditional independence had the best overall performance. Unfortunately, none of the models were able to achieve the degree of accuracy which would be required in a medical setting.

APACHE↗

PubMed2006

Hazardous to your health: kinetic foundations of risk stratification and therapeutic triage.

BACKGROUND: Risk stratification is widely used in the prognostic assessment of patients with a variety of clinical disorders on the unquestioned assumption that the intensity of treatment should be proportionate to the threat of an adverse event over some finite period of time (risk). However, just as the physical trajectory of an object depends on its current magnitude of displacement (velocity) and the concurrent rate of change of that displacement (acceleration), the prognostic trajectory of a patient depends on the current magnitude of risk and the concurrent rate of change of that risk (hazard). Clinical risk stratification nevertheless relies only on the former. METHODS: We therefore integrated the quantitative assessment of risk and hazard by way of a kinetic model that characterizes the development of an adverse event as a series of exponential state-to-state transitions-from stable to unstable to event. This model serves to shift the clinical emphasis from prognosis (the assessment of risk) to treatment (the improvement in outcome). In this context, treatment is well advised (even in low-risk individuals) when the hazard is large (risk is rising), and is less well advised (even in high-risk individuals) when the hazard is small (risk is stable). RESULTS: The kinetic model outlined here thereby promises to supersede the superficial practice of risk stratification with a more sophisticated strategy of therapeutic triage that allows one to predict the incremental clinical benefit of alternative treatment strategies.

Humans↗

PubMed2006

Risk stratification in acute coronary syndromes--does the TIMI risk score work in unselected cases?

BACKGROUND: Management of patients with an acute coronary syndrome (ACS) requires accurate risk stratification to guide appropriate therapy. AIM: To assess the utility of the TIMI risk score in stratifying patients with possible ACS in routine clinical practice. DESIGN: Prospective observational study. METHODS: We recruited 869 consecutive patients with a diagnosis of possible ACS attending the acute medical receiving unit of a district general hospital. The main outcome measures were recurrent myocardial infarction, urgent revascularization, and all-cause mortality. TIMI risk score was calculated for each patient, and each was also assigned a risk group based on electrocardiogram (ECG) changes and troponin levels only. After follow-up, Cox univariate and multivariate regression was used to evaluate the influence of potential risk factors on duration of event-free survival, and likelihood ratio tests to assess the fit of the models. RESULTS: Increasing TIMI risk score was associated with increased risk of events (p<0.001), as was higher risk group from ECG plus troponin stratification (p<0.001). The likelihood ratio comparison favoured the TIMI risk score (difference 13.910, 5 degrees of freedom, p = 0.016). DISCUSSION: The TIMI risk score is a valid tool for risk stratification in unselected cases with possible acute coronary syndrome. It is superior to ECG changes and troponin alone, although this simpler method also achieves good risk stratification.

Adolescent↗

PubMed1999

Applying risk assessment models in general surgery: effective risk stratification.

The risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in general surgery patients varies from 10-50% depending on the type of surgery and underlying patient risk factors. Despite the availability of effective antithrombotic therapies, thromboprophylaxis is substantially underused in the general surgical field. The development of risk assessment models (RAMs) that can accurately and prospectively categorize patients according to their thromboembolic risk level may lead to improved use of thromboprophylaxis. Several evidence-based RAMs are now available that include general surgery in their range of clinical categories, allowing patients to be stratified rapidly for thromboembolic risk. Therapeutic recommendations are included in some cases. Tailoring anticoagulant therapy according to risk of VTE should maximize the clinical benefit and cost-effectiveness of prophylaxis, and minimize the risk of bleeding complications. Further studies are required to validate novel RAMs in clinical practice, and to extend their scope to include patient groups with particular needs, such as those undergoing neurosurgical procedures.

Humans↗

PubMed2006

Additive role of plasma von Willebrand factor levels to clinical factors for risk stratification of patients with atrial fibrillation.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: To aid decisions for thromboprophylaxis in atrial fibrillation (AF), several risk stratification schemes that predict stroke risk according to clinical and echocardiographic features have been published. von Willebrand factor (vWf) is a plasma markers of endothelial damage/dysfunction and is associated with the risk of stroke and vascular events in AF patients. This study determined the additive role of plasma vWf levels to clinical factors for risk stratification in patients with AF. METHODS: We classified 994 AF patients who were enrolled in the SPAF III trial as being at low, moderate, or high risk of stroke and thromboembolism according to the Birmingham and CHADS(2) risk stratification schemes. vWf levels were classified as elevated when >or=158 IU /dL. Rates of ischemic stroke and vascular events within each clinical risk stratum with and without plasma vWf levels were compared. RESULTS: The accuracy of both clinical risk stratification schemes was similar for predicting event rates (Birmingham: ischemic strokes, 0.642; vascular events, 0.670; CHADS(2): ischemic strokes, 0.672; vascular events, 0.672). Subsequent addition of categorized vWf levels to both clinical risk stratification schemes further refined risk stratification for stroke and vascular events. When added to the Birmingham and CHADS(2) clinical risk stratification, high vWf levels were independently associated with a risk of vascular events (hazard ratio, 2.05; 95% confidence interval, 1.30 to 3.22 and 2.01, 1.27 to 3.18 with Birmingham and CHADS(2), respectively) but not ischemic stroke. CONCLUSIONS: When added to clinical risk stratification schemes (Birmingham; CHADS(2)), plasma vWf levels refined clinical risk stratification for stroke and vascular events among AF patients. vWf levels may aid decisions about thromboprophylaxis, particularly among AF patients at moderate risk.

Aged↗

PubMed2026

Risk stratification in aortic stenosis: exercise haemodynamics to refine risk in early cardiac damage stages.

AIMS: To describe exercise haemodynamics across cardiac damage stages and evaluate the incremental prognostic impact of cardiac damage stage and exercise-induced pulmonary hypertension (exPHT) in patients with symptomatic moderate aortic stenosis (AS) and asymptomatic severe AS. METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 436 consecutive patients with ≥ moderate AS (74 ± 10 years, 32% women, 56% severe AS) underwent cardiopulmonary exercise testing with echocardiography. The primary endpoint was heart failure (HF) death and HF hospitalizations. Cardiac damage stage was 0 in 93 patients, 1 (LV damage) in 135, 2 (LA/mitral damage) in 135, and 3-4 (pulmonary vasculature/tricuspid or RV damage) in 73. Higher stages were associated with worse exercise capacity and haemodynamics. Over a median follow-up of 37 months, 65 patients met the primary endpoint. After adjustment for age, AS severity, and aortic valve replacement, cardiac damage stage and exPHT were independently associated with HF outcomes [HR per stage increase 1.51 (1.26-1.82); P < 0.001; exPHT HR 2.36 (1.10-5.07); P = 0.03]. exPHT improved risk stratification in early-stage disease (stages 1-2), conferring an approximately five-fold higher risk of HF events in patients with exPHT [HR 4.45 (1.58-12.59); P < 0.01]. CONCLUSION: In patients with ≥ moderate AS and discordant symptoms, cardiac damage stage and exPHT independently refined HF risk stratification. ExPHT provides incremental prognostic value in early damage stages (1-2), representing over half of the cohort, supporting a stepwise approach of routine damage staging with selective with exPHT assessment with exercise echocardiography in this subgroup to guide more personalized management and potentially optimize AVR timing.

Humans↗

PubMed2001

Influence of different echocardiographic criteria for detection of left ventricular hypertrophy on cardiovascular risk stratification in recently diagnosed essential hypertensives.

BACKGROUND: Hypertensive patients with left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) need a prompter and more intensive pharmacological treatment than subjects without evidence of cardiac involvement. So the detection of LVH plays an important role for decision-making in hypertensives. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of different echocardiographic criteria to define LVH in a more precise stratification of absolute cardiovascular risk in hypertensives without target organ damage (TOD) as assessed by routine investigations. METHODS: A total of 100 never treated patients with grade 1 and 2 essential hypertension (53 men, 47 women, age 44 +/- 12 years) referred for the first time to our outpatient clinic were included in the study. They underwent the following procedures: (1) family and personal medical history, (2) clinic blood pressure (BP) measurement, (3) routine blood chemistry and urine analysis, (4) electrocardiogram, (5) echocardiogram. Risk was stratified according to the criteria suggested by the 1999 WHO-ISH guidelines. TOD was initially evaluated by routine procedures only, and subsequently reassessed by using six different echocardiographic criteria to recognise LVH: (a) left ventricular mass index (LVMI) >120 g/m(2) in men and 100 g/m(2) in women; (b) 125 g/m(2) in men and 110 g/m(2) in women; (c) 134 g/m(2) in men and 110 g/m(2) in women; (d) 125 g/m(2) in men and 125 g/m(2) in women; (e) 51 g/m(2.7) in men and 47 g/m(2.7) in women; (f) 126 g/m in men and 105 g/m in women. RESULTS: According to the first classification based on routine investigations, 46% were low risk and 54% were medium risk patients. Significant changes in risk stratification were obtained when LVH was assessed by echocardiography. A percentage of patients, ranging from 9 (f) to 25% (d), were found to having LVH according to different criteria, and consequently moved from low and medium risk strata to high risk stratum. CONCLUSIONS: The detection of LVH by echocardiography allowed a much more accurate identification of high risk patients. In particular our results suggest that: (1) cardiovascular risk stratification only based on a simple routine work-up can often underestimate overall risk; (2) a better standardisation in defining LVH is needed, considering that the impact of cardiac hypertrophy on risk stratification is markedly dependent on the echocardiographic criteria used to diagnose it.

Adult↗

PubMed2006

Admission B-type natriuretic peptide assessment improves early risk stratification by Killip classes and TIMI risk score in patients with acute ST elevation myocardial infarction treated with primary angioplasty.

BACKGROUND: TIMI risk score for ST elevation acute myocardial infarction (STEMI) and Killip classes are simple tools for early risk stratification. AIM: This study aims to evaluate the hypothesis that admission of BNP adds prognostic information to Killip classes and TIMI risk score in patients with STEMI treated with primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). METHODS: BNP concentrations in blood samples obtained on admission in 126 consecutive patients (mean age 58.8+/-10.7 years old) with STEMI were assessed with means of point-of-care test before PCI. A 42-day follow-up for total mortality was performed. RESULTS: BNP levels increased significantly with increasing Killip classes and TIMI risk score. Addition of BNP to Killip classes and to TIMI risk score increased area under the ROC from 0.704 to 0.887 and from 0.852 to 0.918, respectively. There was a significant increase in mortality in the subgroups by Killip classes and BNP: 1.1% for Killip I and BNP < 331 mg/ml; 16% for Killip I or BNP > or = 331 mg/ml; 55.6% for Killip I and BNP > or = 331 mg/ml; p<0.0001; and in subgroups by TIMI risk score and BNP: 0% for TIMI risk score < 4 and BNP < 331 pg/ml; 2.8% for TIMI risk score > or = 4 and BNP < 331 pg/ml; 12.5% for TIMI risk score < 4 and BNP > or = 331 pg/ml; and 50% for TIMI risk score > or = 4 and BNP > or = 331 pg/ml; (p<0.0001). In multivariate model BNP was a prognostic variable for mortality, independent from TIMI risk score. CONCLUSIONS: Admission of BNP adds significant prognostic information beyond that of Killip classes and TIMI risk score in patients with STEMI treated with PCI.

Adult↗

PubMed2005

Plasma markers of endothelial damage/dysfunction, inflammation and thrombogenesis in relation to TIMI risk stratification in acute coronary syndromes.

Risk stratification at presentation with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) on the basis of the TIMI risk score for unstable angina and non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction (UAP/NSTEMI) identifies patients at high risk of recurrent cardiac events and those who benefit from more aggressive treatment strategy. We hypothesised the following: (a) that a high TIMI risk score brings a greater degree of acute changes in endothelial damage/dysfunction (circulating endothelial cells [CECs], von Willebrand factor [vWf]), inflammation (interleukin-6, IL-6) and blood thrombogenicity (plasma tissue factor, TF); and (b) that these indices are higher in those with high TIMI risk score who experienced recurrent cardiac event at day 14 and day 30. TIMI risk scores were determined at admission and 48 hours later in 88 ACS patients (60 male, age 67+/-12 yrs) with UAP or NSTEMI. CECs, IL-6 and TF levels were measured at both time points and the acute change (delta) calculated. Patients were split into high (score > or =4) or low (<4) TIMI score groups. The composite end point of death, myocardial infarction, and refractory angina requiring revascularisation following 14 and 30 days' follow-up was ascertained. Fifty-eight patients with high TIMI risk score (mean 4.7) had significantly higher baseline and 48 h CEC, vWf, IL-6,TF and deltaTF levels, compared to low TIMI risk score (mean 2.4) patients (all p<0.05). Multivariate Cox regression analysis adjusted for clinical variables and TIMI risk score expressed as either continuous or categorical variable identified baseline CECs and deltavWf levels (both p< or =0.01) as independent predictors of subsequent cardiac events at both 14 days and 30 days. TIMI risk score for UA/NSTEMI identifies those patients with more profound vascular insult, inflammation and thrombogenicity that, in the 'high risk' patient group, predicts short-term outcomes, although vascular damage was the more sensitive predictor. These indices may further refine global risk stratification for short-term adverse cardiac events in these patients.

Acute Disease↗

PubMed1997

Clinical perspective on risk stratification.

Surveys show that subjective risk assessment or risk stratification is often widely inaccurate. Objective data from large observational studies or from clinical trials identifies a persons absolute risk of an event in a given time in order to assess the risk/benefit ratio of a given treatment. In general, the higher the risk the better the risk/benefit ratio. Relative risk reduction by a given treatment is often similar across subgroups divided by sex, age, blood pressure etc.; however if the absolute risk is low it may not e worth taking a treatment with serious side effects (e.g., cerebral haemorrhage). Risk stratification is also important in assessing the cost effectiveness of treatment (e.g,. cholesterol reduction by statins for different groups of the population). Inappropriate surrogate end points should be avoided in cost benefit analysis (e.g., suppression of ventricular ectopic beats by antiarrhythmic drugs). A Bayesian approach should be adopted.

Arrhythmias, Cardiac↗

PubMed2003

Risk stratification and management of sudden cardiac death: a new paradigm.

Risk Stratification and Management of SCD. Management of SCD is undergoing radical change in direction. It is becoming increasingly appreciated that besides depressed left ventricular systolic function and the conventional risk stratification tools, new markers for plaque vulnerability, enhanced thrombogenesis, specific genetic alterations of the autonomic nervous system, cardiac sarcolemmal and contractile proteins, and familial clustering may better segregate patients with atherosclerotic coronary artery disease who are at high risk for SCD from those who may suffer from nonfatal ischemic events. Better understanding of pathophysiologic processes, such as postmyocardial infarction remodeling, the transition from compensated hypertrophy to heart failure, and the increased cardiovascular risk of coronary artery disease in the presence of diabetes or even a prediabetic state will help to improve both risk stratification and management. The rapidly developing fields of microchips technology and proteomics may allow rapid and cost-effective mass screening of multiple risk factors for SCD. The ultimate goal is to identify novel methods for risk stratification, risk modification, and prevention of SCD that could be applied to the general public at large.

Coronary Artery Disease↗

PubMed1995

Risk stratification after myocardial infarction. Clinical evaluation before discharge.

Risk stratification after an acute myocardial infarction suffered a remarkable evolution in the last few years. These improvements were mainly related to the development of reperfusion strategies that changed radically the way we managed acute myocardial infarction. Risk stratification in the reperfusion era occurs in three according to time from admission: Phase I (first 24 hours), Phase II (days 2 to 5), and Phase III (predischarge). In the last years the development of new technologies permitted the study of areas not usually explored in risk stratification, as heart rate variability (autonomic system activation), and signal-averaged electrocardiogram (arrhythmia's substrate). However, risk stratification is an issue that is far from being closed, a lot of controversy still exists in some areas, and new frontiers are emerging in front of us.

Death, Sudden, Cardiac↗

PubMed1998

Improved risk stratification in unstable angina: identification of patients at low risk for in-hospital cardiac events by admission echocardiography.

BACKGROUND: Current protocols for risk stratification of patients with acute chest pain syndromes rely on clinical parameters and are oriented toward identification of patients at high risk for adverse cardiac events; however, this paradigm for risk stratification does not adequately address the observation that adverse cardiac events are relatively uncommon in this population. In an era of cost containment, consideration also should be given to identification of patients at low risk for adverse cardiac events, who may be safely discharged without expensive inpatient hospitalization. HYPOTHESIS: The purpose of this study was to develop echocardiographic predictors that identify unstable angina patients at low risk for adverse cardiac events and that discriminate between low- and high-risk patients. METHODS: The predictive accuracy of retrospectively determined echocardiographic predictors were compared in a population-based sample of 66 consecutive unstable angina patients undergoing echocardiography within 24 h of admission. RESULTS: Echocardiographic predictors of adverse events included wall motion score index > or = 0.2, ejection fraction < or = 40%, and mitral regurgitation severity > 2. One or more echocardiographic predictors of adverse events were present in 32 patients (48%). A composite echocardiographic predictor of adverse events was specific, had a high positive predictive value for the identification of high-risk patients, and discriminated between unstable angina patients at high and low risk for adverse cardiac events. CONCLUSION: Echocardiographic predictors of adverse events are specific and discriminate between unstable angina patients at high and low risk for adverse cardiac events.

Acute Disease↗

PubMed2001

Risk stratification. A practical approach to using epiluminescence microscopy/dermoscopy in melanoma screening.

Risk stratification of pigmented lesions during melanoma screening is a method of classifying lesions into groups based on their relative risk of being melanoma. Risk stratification accepts the fact that clinical examination with and without ELM is not perfect but uses potential ELM clues to early melanoma to increase the sensitivity of screening. Risk stratification permits the use of all available a priori clinical information and the physician's judgement in making a final management decision for each lesion and for each patient. Risk stratification using ELM is based on two primary concepts: (1) a pigment network suggests a lesion is melanocytic and (2) melanoma causes the network to develop heterogeneous (i.e., irregular) and eccentric (i.e., not centered) pigmentation. In applying ELM risk stratification to melanoma screening the physician follows these four steps: 1. Inspect each lesion carefully for a pigment network. 2. If a pigment network is seen, group lesions by their relative degrees of heterogeneity and eccentricity of the pigment network. 3. If a network is not seen, look for typical patterns of benign lesions and melanoma mimickers. 4. Use the resulting clinical risk class to guide management using all available clinical information combined with clinical judgment.

Decision Trees↗

PubMed1999

[Cardiac autonomic tone in risk stratification after myocardial infarct: results of a prospective long-term study of 411 consecutive patients].

Prognosis of patients surviving acute myocardial infarction has substantially improved over the last two decades. However, stratification of patients at risk for death due to arrhythmic events remains a clinical challenge. Due to the important role of the autonomic nervous system in the genesis of sudden death, autonomic markers such as heart rate variability and baroreflex sensitivity have recently gained attention as risk stratification parameters. The present study reports the results of noninvasive risk stratification in 411 consecutive postinfarction patients treated due to contemporary therapeutical guidelines with a high proportion of patients discharged with a patent infarct related artery. The diagnostic arsenal of risk parameters comprised heart rate variability, baroreflex sensitivity, and more traditional markers such as non-sustained ventricular tachycardia, left ventricular ejection fraction, and ventricular late potentials. Patients were followed for a mean of 33 +/- 21 months. Stepwise logistic regression analysis revealed that left ventricular function, both autonomic markers, and the patency of the infarct related artery were independent predictors of the prospectively defined primary study endpoint, i.e., all-cause mortality plus ventricular tachyarrhythmic events. With respect to the secondary endpoint (ventricular tachyarrhythmic events), left ventricular function, heart rate variability, and infarct vessel patency were independent predictors. Ventricular late potentials and nonsustained ventricular tachycardia had no predictive value with respect to ventricular tachyarrhythmic events. These findings from a large prospective long-term study demonstrate the value of markers of cardiac autonomic tone in identifying infarct survivors at risk for malignant ventricular tachyarrhythmias and sudden death.

Adult↗

PubMed1997

Risk stratification after myocardial infarction.

PURPOSE: To review the literature on risk stratification after acute myocardial infarction in the reperfusion era and to propose an algorithm for early and continual risk assessment. DATA SOURCES: A MEDLINE search of the English-language literature on humans was done using the terms myocardial infarction, prospective studies, and prognosis. This search was supplemented by narrowed searches for subheadings (such as cardiogenic shock, thrombolytic therapy, and stress testing) and surveys of references cited in review articles and book chapters. STUDY SELECTION: Literature on prognosis and myocardial infarction published from 1981 to 1996 was considered. From the literature on stress testing methods, studies that enrolled patients before 1980, enrolled patients for indications other than myocardial infarction, tested patients more than 6 weeks after infarction, were missing outcome data, or had inadequate follow-up were excluded. DATA EXTRACTION: Because too few randomized trials were available to allow the cross-comparison of risk-stratification methods, the available observational data were synthesized and supplemented with clinical judgments to produce recommendations. DATA SYNTHESIS: Risk stratification must begin when acute myocardial infarction is diagnosed. High-risk patients (such as those with cardiogenic shock) and candidates for reperfusion therapy must be identified quickly if ideal emergency care is to be given. At specific points during hospitalization, specialized tests may be useful if they add incremental information to the results of clinical evaluations. High-risk patients who have complications after infarction or significant left ventricular dysfunction probably benefit from early angiography; patients without these conditions are at low risk for recurrent events and should have noninvasive stress testing for further risk stratification. CONCLUSIONS: Physicians should continually reappraise risk throughout hospitalization to optimize both patient outcomes and cost containment.

Algorithms↗