First 24-h Sardjito Cardiovascular Intensive Care (SCIENCE) admission risk score to predict mortality in cardiovascular intensive care unit (CICU)

Background and objectives: The application of prognostic scoring systems to identify risk of death within 24 h of CICU admission has significant consequences for clinical decision-making. Previous score of parameters collected after 24 h was considered too late to predict mortality. As a result, we attempted to develop a CICU admission risk score to predict hospital mortality using indicators collected within 24 h. Methods: Data were obtained from SCIENCE registry from January 1, 2021 to December 21, 2021. Outcomes of 657 patients (mean age 58.91 ± 12.8 years) were recorded retrospectively. Demography, risk factors, comorbidities, vital signs, laboratory and echocardiography data at 24-h of patient admitted to CICU were analysed by multivariate logistic regression to create two models of scoring system (probability and cut-off model) to predict in-hospital mortality of any cause. Results: From a total of 657 patients, the hospital mortality was 15%. The significant predictors of mortality were male, acute heart failure, hemodynamic instability, pneumonia, baseline creatinine _x0001_1.5 mg/ dL, TAPSE <17 mm, and the use of mechanical ventilator within first 24-h of CICU admission. Based on Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curve analysis a cut off of _x0001_3 is considered to be a high risk of inhospital mortality (sensitivity 75% and specificity 65%). Conclusion: The initial 24-h SCIENCE admission risk rating system can be used to predict in-hospital mortality in patients admitted to the CICU with a high degree of sensitivity and specificity,

Estimación de riesgo en pacientes con infarto agudo de miocardio con elevación del segmento ST: Su realidad en Cuba

RESUMEN El infarto agudo de miocardio con elevación del segmento ST es una de las enfermedades cardiovasculares con mayor mortalidad. Su pronóstico se relaciona con la probabilidad de desarrollar complicaciones a corto o largo plazo y depende más de las condiciones al ingreso que de los factores de riesgo coronario previos. Los estudios encaminados a desarrollar una fórmula que permita cuantificar riesgo de muerte o complicaciones de un paciente con infarto agudo de miocardio, mediante una puntuación o score, se remontan a la década de 1950. Las diferencias en la aplicabilidad de estas escalas de estratificación de riesgo existentes, a la población cubana, derivan del hecho de haber sido desarrolladas en países de ingresos altos, por lo cual su extrapolación es cuestionable. Existen diferencias sociodemográficas, étnicas, genéticas e idiosincráticas, que pueden ser la causa de que los resultados predichos en los estudios originales no sean reproducibles con exactitud en poblaciones diferentes.

ABSTRACT ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction is one of the cardiovascular diseases with the highest mortality. Its prognosis is related to the probability of developing short- or long-term complications and depends more on conditions at admission than on previous coronary risk factors. Studies aimed at developing a formula to quantify the risk of death or complications in patients with acute myocardial infarction using either a rating or a score date back to the 1950s. Differences in the applicability of these risk stratification scores within the Cuban population are due to the fact that they were developed in high-income countries and, therefore, their extrapolation is questionable. Sociodemographic, ethnic, genetic and idiosyncratic differences may prevent the results predicted in the original studies from being accurately reproduced in different populations.

Valor pronóstico del sistema de calificación APACHE II en el postoperatorio de cirugía cardíaca / Prognostic value of APACHE II score in postoperative of cardiac surgery

Resumen Antecedentes y objetivos: El sistema de calificación APACHE II permite predecir la mortalidad intrahospitalaria en terapia intensiva. Sin embargo, no está validado para cirugía cardíaca, ya que no posee buena capacidad diferenciadora. El objetivo es determinar el valor pronóstico de APACHE II en el postoperatorio de procedimientos cardíacos. Materiales y métodos: Se analizó en forma retrospectiva la base de cirugía cardíaca. Se incluyó a pacientes intervenidos entre 2017 y 2018, de los cuales se calculó la puntuación APACHE II. Se utilizó curva ROC para determinar el mejor valor de corte. El punto final primario fue mortalidad intrahospitalaria. Como puntos finales secundarios se evaluó la incidencia de bajo gasto cardíaco (BGC), accidente cerebrovascular (ACV), sangrado quirúrgico y necesidad de diálisis. Se realizó un modelo de regresión logístico multivariado para ajustar a las variables de interés. Resultados: Se analizó a 559 pacientes. La media del sistema de calificación APACHE II fue de 9.9 (DE 4). La prevalencia de mortalidad intrahospitalaria global fue de 6.1%. El mejor valor de corte de la calificación para predecir mortalidad fue de 12, con un área bajo la curva ROC de 0.92. Los pacientes con APACHE II ≥ 12 tuvieron significativamente mayor mortalidad, incidencia de BGC, ACV, sangrado quirúrgico y necesidad de diálisis. En un modelo multivariado, el sistema APACHE II se relacionó de modo independiente con mayor tasa de mortalidad intrahospitalaria (OR, 1.14; IC95%, 1.08-1.21; p < 0.0001). Conclusiones: El sistema de clasificación APACHE II demostró ser un predictor independiente de mortalidad intrahospitalaria en pacientes que cursan el postoperatorio de cirugía cardíaca.

Abstract Background and objectives: The APACHE II score allows predicting in-hospital mortality in patients admitted to intensive care units. However, it is not validated for patients undergoing cardiac surgery, since it does not have a good discriminatory capacity in this clinical scenario. The aim of this study is to determine prognostic value of APACHE II score in postoperative of cardiac surgery. Materials and methods: The study was performed using the cardiac surgery database. Patients undergoing surgery between 2017 and 2018, with APACHE II score calculated at the admission, were included. The ROC curve was used to determine a cut-off value The primary endpoint was in-hospital death. Secondary endpoints included low cardiac output (LCO), stroke, surgical bleeding, and dialysis requirement. A multivariable logistic regression model was developed to adjust to various variables of interest. Results: The study evaluated 559 patients undergoing cardiac surgery. The mean of APACHE II Score was 9.9 (SD 4). The prevalence of in-hospital death was 6.1%. The best prognostic cut-off value for the primary endpoint was 12, with a ROC curve of 0.92. Patients with an APACHE II score greater than or equal to 12 had significantly higher mortality, higher incidence of LCO, stroke, surgical bleeding and dialysis requirement. In a multivariate logistic regression model, the APACHE II score was independently associated with higher in-hospital death (OR, 1.14; 95CI%, 1.08-1.21; p < 0.0001). Conclusions: The APACHE II Score proved to be an independent predictor of in-hospital death in patients undergoing postoperative cardiac surgery, with a high capacity for discrimination.

Comparison of scores for the classification of cardiometabolic risk in adult patients enrolled in a Venezuelan program for chronic non-communicable diseases: a cross-sectional study

ABSTRACT BACKGROUND: Several continuous measurements of cardiometabolic risk (CMR) have emerged as indexes or scores. To our knowledge, there are no published data on its application and validation in Latin America. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate four continuous measurements of metabolic status and CMR. We established its predictive capacity for four conditions associated with CMR. DESIGN AND SETTING: Cross-sectional study conducted at a healthcare center in the state of Carabobo, Venezuela. METHODS: The sample comprised 176 Venezuelan adults enrolled in a chronic disease care program. Four CMR scores were calculated: metabolic syndrome (MetS) Z-score; cardiometabolic index (ICMet); simple method for quantifying MetS (siMS) score; and siMS risk score. CMR biomarkers, proinflammatory status and glomerular function were assessed. MetS was established in accordance with a harmonized definition. RESULTS: Patients with MetS showed higher levels of all scores. All scores increased as the number of MetS components rose. The scores showed significant correlations with most CMR biomarkers, inflammation and glomerular function after adjusting for age and sex. In the entire sample, MetS Z-score, siMS score and siMS risk score showed the ability to detect MetS, reduced glycemic control, proinflammatory status and decreased estimated glomerular filtration rate. ICMet only discriminated MetS and proinflammatory state. There were some differences in the predictive capacity of the scores according to sex. CONCLUSIONS: The findings support the use of the scores assessed here. Follow-up studies should evaluate the predictive capacity of scores for cardiovascular events and diabetes in the Venezuelan population.

Exploratory analysis of polygenic risk scores for psychiatric disorders: Applied to dual diagnosis

Background Concurrence of substance use disorders (SUDs) is high in individuals with psychiatric illnesses; more importantly, individuals with both disorders (dual diagnosis) have more severe symptoms. Psychiatric disorders have been proposed to share a genetic susceptibility with SUDs. To explore this shared genetic susceptibility, we analyzed whether any of the polygenic risk scores (PRSs) for psychiatric disorders could be associated to dual diagnosis in patients with schizophrenia (SCZ) or bipolar disorder (BD). Methods We included 192 individuals of Mexican ancestry: 72 with SCZ, 53 with BD, and 67 unrelated controls without psychiatric disorders. We derived calculations of PRS for autism spectrum disorders, attention-deficit/hyperactive disorder, BD, major depression, and SCZ using summary genome-wide association statistics previously published. Results We found that dual diagnosis had a shared genetic susceptibility with major depressive disorder (MDD) and SCZ; furthermore, in individuals with BD, dual diagnosis could be predicted by PRS for MDD. Conclusions Our results reinforce the notion that individuals with dual diagnosis have a higher genetic susceptibility to develop both disorders. However, analyses of larger sample sizes are required to further clarify how to predict risks through PRS within different populations.

Comparación de puntajes de riesgo para predecir aterosclerosis subclínica / Comparison of risk scores to predict subclinical atherosclerosis

La aterosclerosis subclínica es un potente predictor de eventos cardiovasculares, aunque se desconoce cuál de los puntajes de riesgo es más eficaz para predecir su presencia en una población latinoamericana. El objetivo fué comparar la performance de los puntajes de riesgo: Framingham, Regicor y Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease Risk Estimator para predecir la existencia de aterosclerosis subclínica en pacientes asintomáticos sin enfermedad cardiovascular conocida; así como determinar la prevalencia y distribución en los distintos lechos vasculares. Desde 2014 a 2017 se evaluaron pacientes de 35 a 75 años asintomáticos y sin enfermedad cardiovascular conocida, a quienes se les realizó una eco Doppler carotídea y femoral, y score de calcio. Se definió como aterosclerosis subclínica a la presencia de placas en las arterias carótidas y/o femorales o a la presencia de calcio en las coronarias (score de Agatston > 0). Se estudiaron así 212 pacientes, edad media 53 ± 7 años, de los cuales el 60% (128) eran varones. La prevalencia de aterosclerosis subclínica fue 62% (131 casos). De esos 131 con placa en alguno de los territorios, el Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease Risk Estimator fue el que identificó el mayor número de casos con riesgo cardiovascular elevado (39%), Framingham detectó 20%, y Regicor 0% (p < 0.01). La reclasificación neta fue del 41%, 50% y 60% respectivamente (< 0.01). La prevalencia de aterosclerosis subclínica en sujetos asintomáticos sin antecedentes de enfermedad cardiovascular fue 62%. El calculador Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease Risk Estimator fue el más efectivo para predecir aterosclerosis subclínica en esta población.

Subclinical atherosclerosis is a powerful predictor of cardiovascular events, although it is unknown which of the risk scores is more useful to predict its presence in a Latin American population. The objective was to compare the performance of the risk scores: Framingham, Regicor and Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease Risk Estimator to predict the presence of subclinical atherosclerosis in asymptomatic persons without known cardiovascular disease; as well as determining its prevalence and distribution in the different vascular beds. From 2014 to 2017, patients from 35 to 75 years, asymptomatic and without known cardiovascular disease who underwent a carotid and femoral Doppler echo and calcium score were evaluated. Subclinical atherosclerosis was defined as the presence of plaques in the carotid and/or femoral arteries or the presence of calcium in the coronary arteries (Agatston score > 0). A total of 212 patients were included. The mean age was 53 ± 7 years, of which 60% (128) were male. The prevalence of subclinical atherosclerosis was 62% (131 cases). Of these 131 subjects with a plaque in any of the territories, the Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease Risk Estimator was the one that identified the highest number of cases with high cardiovascular risk (39%), Framingham detected 20%, and Regicor 0% (p < 0.01). The net reclassification was 41%, 50% and 60% respectively (< 0.01). The prevalence of subclinical atherosclerosis in asymptomatic persons without a history of cardiovascular disease was 62%. The Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease Risk Estimator was the most effective predictor of subclinical atherosclerosis in this population.

A comparative study of lipid profile in smokers and non smokers between 30 to 40 years and prediction of 10 years risk of cardiovascular disease based on Framingham scores

Background: Atherosclerosis has been described as a lipid driven inflammatory disorder of the arterial wall. Smoking is one of the most common modifiable risk factors for atherosclerosis and is the major epidemiological factor in increasing morbidity and mortality of chronic heart diseases (CHD). The objectives of this study were based on to estimate the status of lipid profile in both smokers and non-smokers and compare with each other, to predict the 10 years risk of cardiovascular risk based on Framingham score in smokers and non-smokers.Methods: This retrospective, case-control study was conducted among 50 smokers (cases) and 50 normal individuals (controls) attending to the department of medicine during the period between December 2016 and May 2018. The socio-demographic data and clinical history was obtained using a semi-structured questionnaire and then patients were subjected to blood investigations including estimation of lipid profile by CHOD/PAP method.Results: The mean age of the study participants was 34.7±2.9 years. The duration of smoking among the smokers was 5.4±2.9 years on an average. There was a significant increase in serum cholesterol levels (245.6±39.8 versus 155.8±15.2 mg/dl), serum triglycerides (217.3±42.2mg/dl versus 127.4±10.6), LDL (171.1±35.2 versus 85.7±15.1 mg/dl) and VLDL (43.5±10.5 versus 15.3±5.5mg/dl) among the smokers versus non-smokers. There was a significant (p<0.001) decrease in HDL levels among the smokers (30.8±3.4 mg/dl) when compared with the non-smokers (44.8±5.3 mg/dl). There was a highly significant difference between Framingham risk scores of smokers and non-smokers.Conclusions: The study established that the lipid profile was deranged towards atherogenesis among the smokers when compared to the non-smokers which was reflected in the significant increase in risk as calculated by Framingham risk score.

Estratificación del riesgo cardiovascular con diferentes puntajes de riesgo en prevención primaria y sus implicaciones en la indicación de estatinas / Use of Different Scores for Cardiovascular Risk Stratification in Primary Prevention and Their Implications in Statin Indication

Introducción: En nuestro medio no contamos con un puntaje de riesgo cardiovascular surgido de un estudio epidemiológico local, por lo que habitualmente se emplean puntajes desarrollados a partir de grandes estudios epidemiológicos de otras regiones que, si bien resultan herramientas muy útiles en la práctica clínica, tienen limitaciones relacionadas con la calibración y la capacidad de discriminación. Objetivos: 1) Estratificar el riesgo cardiovascular de una población en prevención primaria utilizando diferentes puntajes. 2) Estimar la concordancia entre dichos puntajes. 3) Analizar la recomendación de estatinas. 4) Estimar la prevalencia de placa aterosclerótica carotídea (PAC) y el punto de corte óptimo (PCO) del nuevo puntaje americano (NP) que discrimine entre sujetos con PAC o sin PAC. Material y métodos: Se incluyeron pacientes en prevención primaria, sin diabetes ni tratamiento hipolipemiante. Se calcularon los puntajes de Framingham (PF), europeo (PE), el recomendado por la OMS (POMS) y el propuesto por las nuevas guías americanas y se analizó la concordancia entre los diferentes puntajes. La indicación de estatinas se consideró en base a cada función de riesgo. La prevalencia de PAC se determinó mediante ultrasonido. Se realizó un análisis ROC. Resultados: Se analizaron 772 pacientes (edad 52 ± 11 años, 66% mujeres), de los cuales de acuerdo con los puntajes P F, PE y POMS se clasificaron de "riesgo bajo" el 76,8%, el 50,9% y el 91,7%, respectivamente. La concordancia fue pobre entre los tres puntajes (kappa 0,14). El 23,6%, el 7% y el 33% de los casos tenían indicación absoluta de estatinas en base al P F, el PE y el N P, respectivamente. Cuando no existía dicha indicación y utilizando los mismos puntajes, el 23,5%, el 50% y el 18% de los sujetos tenían una recomendación opcional. Aplicando el POMS, solo se trataría al 3% de los pacientes. La prevalencia de PAC fue más alta en los estratos de mayor riesgo, aunque no despreciable en sujetos con riesgo bajo. El PCO del NP fue 5,2%. Conclusiones: La estratificación del riesgo y la indicación de estatinas varían según la función de riesgo utilizada. Conocer la relación entre la presencia de PAC y los puntajes podría mejorar la estimación del riesgo en nuestra población.

Background: Our setting lacks a cardiovascular risk score arising from a local epidemiological study, and so scores developed from great epidemiological studies in other regions are used. However, although these scores are very useful in clinical practice, they have limitations associated to calibration and discrimination capacity. Objectives: The purpose of this study was to 1) to stratify cardiovascular risk in a primary prevention population using different scores; 2) to estimate the concordance between these scores; 3) to analyze statin use recommendations; and 4) to estimate the prevalence of carotid atherosclerotic plaque (CAP) and the optimal cut-off point (OCP) of the new American score (NS) to discriminate between subjects with or without CAP. Methods: Primary prevention patients without diabetes or lipid-lowering therapy were included in the study. The Framingham score (FS), the European score (ES), the score recommended by the World Health Organization (WHOS) and the NS proposed by the new American guidelines were calculated, analyzing the concordance among them. The indication of statins was based on each score. Ultrasound was used to assess CAP occurrence. A ROC analysis was performed to analyze results. Results: The study included 772 patients. Mean age was 52 ± 11 years and 66% were women. According to FS, ES and WHOS, 78.8%, 50.9% and 91.7% of the population were respectively classified at "low risk". A poor level of agreement between scores was found (kappa 0.14). The percentage of cases with absolute indication for statins based on FS, ES and NS was 23.6%, 7% and 33%, respectively. When there was no such indication and using the same scores, 23.5%, 50% and 18% of subjects had an optional recommendation. Applying WHOS, only 3% of patients would have been treated. The prevalence of CAP was greater in higher risk strata, though not negligible in low risk subjects. The OCP for NS was 5.2%. Conclusions: Risk stratification and the use of statins vary according to the cardiovascular score used. Knowledge of the relationship between presence of CAP and scores could improve the estimation of risk in our population.

Validación de las escalas de riesgo TIMI y GRACE para el síndrome coronario agudo en una cohorte contemporánea de pacientes / Validation of GRACE and TIMI risk scales for acute coronary syndrome in a contemporary cohort of patients

Introducción: la estratificación de riesgo es uno de los principales objetivos en el manejo integral de los síndromes coronarios agudos (SCA). En la actualidad las guías de práctica clínica recomiendan la estratificación por medio de los puntajes de riesgo TIMI y GRACE. Teniendo en cuenta la alta prevalencia de esta enfermedad, consideramos de gran importancia conocer en nuestro medio la utilidad de estas escalas para el tratamiento integral de nuestros pacientes con SCA y determinar cuál escala tiene mejor capacidad de predicción para morbimortalidad. Objetivo: evaluar la validez de las escalas TIMI y GRACE para predecir el riesgo de muerte e infarto en los pacientes que se presentan con diagnóstico de síndrome coronario agudo en la unidad de dolor torácico del Hospital San Vicente de Paúl Fundación, y establecer cuál de estas dos escalas tiene mejor capacidad de predicción en nuestro medio en SCA sin elevación del segmento ST. Métodos: estudio de validez de una escala de pronóstico, observacional, analítico, con análisis retrospectivo de la calibración del modelo y la discriminación del riesgo, en una cohorte de pacientes en hospital de cuarto nivel en Medellín, Colombia. Resultados: 164 sujetos con SCA fueron identificados. 141 pacientes con seguimiento completo hasta los seis meses. El TIMI promedio fue de 3.5 puntos y el GRACE promedio de 124. La estratificación del TIMI para SCA sin elevación del segmento ST mostró: 19.1% de pacientes en riesgo bajo, 59.6% en riesgo intermedio y 21.3% en riesgo alto; según la escala de riesgo GRACE encontramos para muerte hospitalaria: 38.3% de pacientes en riesgo bajo, 32.6% en riesgo intermedio y 29.1% en riesgo alto. Para estratificación de muerte a seis meses se encontró 39.7% en riesgo bajo, 36.2% en riesgo intermedio y 24.1% en riesgo alto. La evaluación del componente de calibración mostró que ambas escalas se ajustan a nuestra muestra para SCA sin elevación ST (Prueba de Hosmer-Lemeshow p > 0.05). La evaluación del componente de discriminación mostró que ambas escalas pueden distinguir la población de mayor riesgo a seis meses (estadístico C mayor a 0.7). La escala TIMI discriminó mejor el riesgo de muerte intrahospitalaria comparada con el GRACE (estadístico C= 0.9 versus 0.8). La escala GRACE por el contrario, presentó mejor poder de discriminación de muerte a seis meses (0.86 versus 0.65). Conclusión: ambas escalas se ajustaron a la población estudiada, son útiles y pueden recomendarse para determinar el riesgo de mortalidad de nuestros pacientes con SCA. Para el SCA sin ST, la escala de riesgo TIMI discriminó mejor el riesgo a nivel hospitalario, mientras que la escala GRACE fue mejor para predecir el riesgo a los seis meses después del SCA sin elevación del segmento ST.

Background: risk stratification is one of the main objectives in the comprehensive management of acute coronary syndromes (ACS). Currently, clinical practice guidelines recommend stratification by the TIMI and GRACE risk scores. Given the high prevalence of this disease, we attach great importance to know in our environment the usefulness of these scales for the comprehensive treatment of our patients with ACS and determine which scale has better predictive power for morbidity and mortality. Objective: to assess the validity of the TIMI and GRACE risk scores to predict death and infarction in patients presenting with diagnosis of acute coronary syndrome in the chest pain unit of the Hospital San Vicente de Paul Fundación, and establish which of these two scales has better predictive power in ACS without ST segment elevation in our environment. Methods: validation study of a prognostic scale, observational, analytical, with retrospective analysis of model calibration and risk discrimination in a cohort of patients at a fourth level hospital in Medellin, Colombia. Results: 164 subjects with ACS were identified. 141 patients with complete follow-up to 6 months. The average TIMI was 3.5 points and the GRACE average 124. TIMI stratification for ACS without ST-segment elevation showed 19.1% of patients at low risk, 59.6% at intermediate risk and 21.3% at high risk; according to the GRACE risk score for hospital death, were found: 38.3% of patients at low risk, at intermediate risk 32.6% and 29.1% at high risk. For stratification of death at six months, was found: 39.7% at low-risk, 36.2% at intermediate risk and 24.1% at high risk. The evaluation of the component of calibration showed that both scales fit our sample for ACS without ST elevation (Hosmer-Lemeshow test p> 0.05). The evaluation of the component of discrimination showed that both scales can distinguish the population of higher-risk to 6 months (C statistic greater than 0.7 C). The TIMI scale better discriminated risk of hospital death compared with GRACE (C statistic = 0.9 versus 0.8). On the contrary, the GRACE scale showeda better discrimination power of death at 6 months. (0.86 versus 0.65). Conclusion: both scales were adjusted to the population studied, are useful and can be recommended to determine the risk of mortality in our patients with ACS. For ACS without ST elevation, the TIMI risk score discriminated better the hospital risk, while GRACE scale was better at predicting risk at 6 months after ACS without ST segment elevation.

Revisión sobre instrumentos de estimación de riesgo de enfermedad cardiovascular / Review of tools for estimating risk of cardiovascular disease

Introducción: Las enfermedades cardiovasculares son la principal causa de morbimortalidad en el mundo, sin embargo una proporción significativa de las mismas podrían prevenirse efectuando intervenciones oportunas. Uno de los instrumentos utilizados al momento de decidir sobre estas intervenciones son las tablas o scores de riesgo cardiovascular. Objetivos: Revisar la utilidad y aplicabilidad de los scores de riesgo cardiovascular en el primer nivel de atención, y realizar una crítica hacia algunos de los indicadores incluidos en ellos a la luz de la evidencia actual. Metodología: Se efectuó una revisión bibliográfica sobre los principales scores de riesgo cardiovascular utilizados a nivel mundial, a fin de realizar un análisis de ellos, poniendo énfasis en su utilidad y aplicabilidad en la Argentina. Conclusión: Las tablas de riesgo cardiovascular deben considerarse un instrumento más, contextualizadas para cada sujeto o comunidad, para definir las mejores estrategias de abordaje. Se debe considerar incluir indicadores como el nivel de actividad física o grado de sedentarismo y revisar otros que posiblemente no tengan tanta utilidad según la última evidencia.

Introduction: Cardiovascular disease is the main morbimortality cause worldwide, although a significative proportion could be prevented withthe addecuate interventions. One of the tools use to take decitions on interventions are the Risk Scores. Objectives: To review the utility and applicability of the Cardiovascular Risk Scores en the Primary Level of Attention and to examinate certain indicators with the new evidence.Methodology: We review the evidence about the more worldwide used Cardiovascular Risk Scores emphasizing their utility and applicability inargentine population. Conclusion: The Scores must be used as a tool to asses cardiovascular risk contextualizing its results to take decitions about interventions at individual and community bases.

Risk score for postoperative complications in thoracic surgery / 대한마취과학회지

BACKGROUND: Risk scoring system for thoracic surgery patients have not been widely used, as of recently. We tried to forge a risk scoring system that predicts the risk of postoperative complications in patients undergoing major thoracic surgery. We used a prolonged ICU stay as a representative of postoperative complications and tested various possible risk factors for its relation. METHODS: Data from all patients who underwent major lung and esophageal cancer surgeries, between 2005 and 2007 in our hospital, were collected retrospectively (n = 858). Multiple logistic regression analysis was performed with various possible risk factors to build the risk scoring system for prolonged ICU stay (> 3 days). RESULTS: A total of 9% of patients exhibited more than 3 days of ICU stay. Age, operation name, preoperative lung injury, no epidural analgesia, and predicted post operative forced expiratory volume in 1 second (ppoFEV1) were the risk factors for prolonged ICU stay, by multivariable analysis (P < 0.05). Risk score, p was derived from the formula: logit(p/[1-p]) = -5.39 + 0.06 x age + 1.12 x operation name(2) + 1.52 x operation name(3) + 1.32 x operation name(4) + 1.56 x operation name(5) + 1.30 x preoperative lung injury + 0.72 x no epidural analgesia - 0.02 x ppoFEV1 [Age in years, operation name(2): pneumonectomy, operation name(3): esophageal cancer operation, operation name(4): completion pneumonectomy, operation name(5): extended operation, preoperative lung injury(+), epidural analgesia(-), ppoFEV1 in %]. CONCLUSIONS: Age, operation name, preoperative lung injury, epidural analgesia, and ppoFEV1 can predict postoperative morbidity in thoracic surgery patients.

Risco cardiovascular na síndrome metabólica: estimativa por diferentes escores / Cardiovascular risk in metabolic syndrome: estimating by different criteria

JUSTIFICATIVA E OBJETIVOS: A síndrome metabólica (SM) constitui importante indicador de risco cardiovascular, estando associada a elevadas taxas de mortalidade por doença arterial coronariana (DAC). O objetivo deste estudo foi comparar três diferentes escores de avaliação de DAC em portadores de SM. MÉTODO: Trinta e nove pacientes não diabéticos, portadores de SM foram avaliados pelo Escore de Risco de Framingham (ERF), pelo ERF modificado pela IV Diretriz Brasileira sobre Dislipidemias e Aterosclerose (ERF-mod) e pelo escore do Prospective Cardiovascular Münster Study (PROCAM). RESULTADOS: O risco estimado de DAC pelo ERF foi baixo em 35 (90%) indivíduos e médio, em quatro (10%), não sendo detectado alto risco em nenhum caso. Pelo PROCAM, 29 (74%) indivíduos continuaram na faixa de baixo risco, sete (18%) apresentaram médio risco e três (8%); alto risco. Por outro lado, o ERF-mod detectou cinco casos (13%) de baixo risco, 30 (77%) casos de médio risco e quatro (10%) de alto risco. CONCLUSÃO: Comparado com o ERF-mod, o ERF subestimou o cálculo do risco de DAC em pacientes com SM, enquanto o PROCAM apresentou eficácia ligeiramente superior ao ERF.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Metabolic syndrome (MS) is an indicator of cardiovascular risk associated with high rates of coronary heart disease (CHD) mortality. The aim of this study was to assess the CHD risk in patients with metabolic syndrome (MS) using three different scores. METHOD: Thirty nine non-diabetic patients with MS were evaluated by the Framingham Risk Score (FRS), FRS modified by IV Diretriz Brasileira sobre Dislipidemias e Aterosclerose (mod-FRS) and by Prospective Cardiovascular Münster Study score (PROCAM). RESULTS: Based in the FRS the CHD risk in 10 years was considered low in 35 (90%) individuals and intermediate in 4 (10%), with no patient in high risk group. According to PROCAM 29 (74%) individuals were in low risk group, 7 (18%) in the intermediate risk and 3 (8%) in high risk group. On the other hand, the mod-FRS detected 5 (13%) subjects in low risk, 30 (77%) in the intermediate and 4 (10%) individuals in the high risk group.CONCLUSION: Framingham Risk Score was less accurate than the FRS-mod for the assessment of CHD risk in subjects with MS while the PROCAM score was slightly better than FRS for this purpose.