729 EDITORIAL Heart: first published as 10.1136/hrt.2004.034546 on 14 June 2004. Downloaded from Risk stratification in acute coronary syndrome: focus on unstable angina/non-ST segment elevation myocardial infarction R Bugiardini ............................................................................................................................... Heart 2004;90:729–731. doi: 10.1136/hrt.2004.034546 Although there have been advances in the management of fashion. Experts in a variety of fields make decisions using a more intuitive process of unstable angina/non-ST segment elevation myocardial recognising patterns and applying their own infarction syndromes, the rate of cardiovascular mortality rules. In varying proportions, pathophysiologic after discharge is still unacceptably high. With many reasoning, personal clinical experience, and recent published research each play a role in therapeutic options available, the clinician is challenged to the development of our own clinical rules. This identify the safest and most effective treatment for long term approach may produce incorrect use of tools of survival of each individual patient risk stratifications and inappropriate use of treatment strategies and procedures. However, ........................................................................... errors are more often due to ‘‘failure’’ of the system, not of the doctors. Most errors occur at the transfer of care, and particularly at the transfer from the outpatient to the inpatient ‘‘Simple, but not too simple’’—Albert Einstein sites. There are a number of programs now focusing on errors and strategies to reduce errors welve million individuals in the USA and (GAP, CRUSADE QI, JACHO).5–7 All of these 143 million worldwide have coronary artery programs focus on education of physicians, Tdisease. Two million US patients are better interaction between health care organisa- admitted annually to cardiac care units with tions and physicians, and appropriate use of care acute coronary syndromes (ACS). The number of pathways. hospital admission for patients with unstable angina/non-ST segment elevation myocardial http://heart.bmj.com/ infarction (UN/NSTEMI) is greater than the SCORES TO PREDICT IN-HOSPITAL RISK number with ST elevation myocardial infarction: Scores represent a simple, convenient method of 600 000 and 1.4 million, respectively.1 risk stratification, in which a number of inde- Extensive clinical trial data have provided pendent risk factors on presentation are shown substantial evidence to develop guidelines for to have prognostic significance. Independent risk risk stratification of UA/NSTEMI.23 However, factors may not necessarily represent ‘‘indepen- short term mortality in clinical trials is approxi- dent’’ pathophysiologic processes. Regression modelling techniques for prognostic analysis mately 2% compared with 4–5% mortality in on September 29, 2021 by guest. Protected copyright. clinical practice.4 The gap between today’s can be enhanced by the use of indexes that knowledge in terms of volume of studies and combine several clinical variables measuring guidelines and their application may provide different aspects of the same underlying patho- only a partial explanation for the difference. physiologic phenomenon. For example, the Guidelines are prepared for physicians practising presence of high troponin T concentrations, in primary and secondary centres, in most congestive heart failure, low left ventricular of which an invasive therapy is available. ejection fraction, history of myocardial infarc- Guidelines are based on results of clinical trials. tion, and Q waves on ECG all measure different Patient enrolment in clinical trials is extremely aspects of the extent of myocardial damage. selective. There are few women, patients are Placing each of these variables separately in a relatively young, and few patients have diabetes, stepwise regression analysis might overlook the heart failure or prior revascularisation. The full importance of myocardial damage as a overall consequence is that clinical trial guide- prognostic factor. A clinical index that combines lines could not mimic actual clinical practice. We the information provided from several related ....................... need systems to minimise errors, to provide variables is a more powerful prognostic factor simple clinical models and scores to predict in- than any individual variable. Correspondence to: hospital risk, comparative studies to support R Bugiardini, MD, choices between alternative strategies, and eva- Dipartimento di Medicina Interna, Cardioangiologia, luation of the impact of prognostic indexes on Abbreviations: ACS, acute coronary syndromes; Epatologia, University of patient long term outcome. GRACE, global registry of acute coronary events; Bologna, Via Massarenti 9 PURSUIT, platelet glycoprotein IIb/IIIa in unstable angina: - 40138 Bologna – Italy; receptor suppression using Integrilin therapy; TIMI, raffaele.bugiardini@ SOURCES OF ERROR thrombolysis in myocardial infarction; UA/STEMI, unibo.it Although applying guidelines is highly rational, unstable angina/non-ST- segment elevation myocardial ....................... clinicians do not often make decisions in this infarction www.heartjnl.com 730 Editorial The three major determinants of prognosis in ACS include: best therapeutic strategy. In this issue of Heart, Nørgaard and (1) the extent of myocardial injury; (2) the extent of coronary colleagues16 provide further information in this area. They artery disease; and (3) the instability of the disease and its followed patients admitted with diagnosis of UA/NSTEMI for Heart: first published as 10.1136/hrt.2004.034546 on 14 June 2004. Downloaded from refractoriness to management. The GRACE and PURSUIT a median of 28 months. Independent predictors of cardiac scores are prominent examples of scoring systems that give death and acute myocardial infarction were age . 65 years, an overview of myocardial injury.89These scores provided an previous myocardial infarction, congestive heart failure, ST excellent ability to assess risk for in-hospital and short term segment shifts at 24 hour ECG recording, and troponin T. mortality. Age, Killip class, heart rate, systolic blood pressure, They estimated the probability of a patient being alive at any ST segment deviation, resuscitation from cardiac arrest, point in time after study entry. The prognostic value of serum creatinine concentration, and raised cardiac enzymes transient ST segment shifts was confined to the medium term were powerful predictors of prognosis in almost all patients. outcome (1–4 months). Troponin T provided long term The TIMI risk score seems to look more at the extent of prognostic information above and beyond conventional coronary artery disease and its instability.10 Seven indepen- clinical risk markers such as previous myocardial infarction dent predictor variables were identified: age . 65 years, three and congestive heart failure. cardiovascular risk factors, known coronary artery disease Data imply plausible pathogenetic mechanisms that fit (50% stenosis), severe anginal symptoms (two episodes in with the widely accepted notion of the disease. ST segment preceding 24 hours), use of aspirin in the last seven days, ST shifts could reflect instability where persistence of acute segment deviation . 0.05 mV, and elevated serum cardiac stimuli may cause waxing and waning of intracoronary markers of necrosis. thrombosis and related transient myocardial ischaemia. High The advantage of these scoring systems is that they troponin values could correlate with both myocardial injury summarise important prognostic information of the disease and extent of coronary disease.17 in a single number, confidence limits can be easily calculated, Effective therapeutic options for ACS are costly. We need and survival rates can be easily compared between given studies to support choices. There is no consensus on how the treatments. long term use of many drugs should be undertaken. The link between ST segment shifts and medium term outcome could PROGNOSTIC INDEXES OF LONG TERM OUTCOME give insights into this matter. Detection of unstable patients A major issue in the management of ACS is the risk as well as of a specific vulnerable period of time might be a stratification of those individuals who have survived the rationale for the use of new, costly, potent antiplatelet and initial hospital admission without acute myocardial infarc- anti-inflammatory drugs in this setting. tion, and are being prepared for discharge. Despite a substantial improvement in intra-hospital assessment and CONCLUSIONS care, patients still have a considerably high incidence of Substantial advances in the management of UA/NSTEMI medium to long term adverse outcomes. The risk continues to syndromes have occurred in the last decade. A disturbing increase for at least 3–4 years after an episode of unstable note, however, is the recognition that the rate of cardiovas- syndromes.11 Death may range from 1.7% after one month to cular mortality after discharge is still unacceptably high. With 9.5% after two years. Current areas of research try to address many therapeutic options available, the clinician is chal- 11–13 this issue. C reactive protein, troponin T, heart rate, ST lenged to identify the safest and most effective treatment for http://heart.bmj.com/ segment depression on standard ECG, diabetes, congestive long term survival of each individual patient. Steps in this heart failure, creatinine clearance,