TIMI, GRACE and alternative risk scores in Acute Coronary Syndromes: A meta-analysis of 40 derivation studies on 216,552 patients and of 42 validation studies on 31,625 patients
Introduction
Acute coronary syndromes (ACS) represent a wide clinical spectrum, ranging from unstable angina (UA) to ST Elevation Myocardial infarction (STEMI). There is heterogeneity of diagnosis, treatment, and prognosis at different ends of this ACS spectrum [1], [2].
The use and development of dedicated scores to discriminate patients at high risk of serious adverse events from low risk ones has been suggested and encouraged by many cardiology expert groups in order to allow accurate therapeutic and diagnostic decision making. [3] Risk assessment remains crucial as the benefits of more aggressive and costly treatments are greatest in patients at higher risk of adverse clinical events [4], [5], [6].
Much effort has therefore been put into designing risk scores for ACS patients. The two most commonly used being the Global Registry in Acute Coronary Events (GRACE) [4] and the Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) [7] scores. Both are derived from landmark ACS studies and have undergone wide prospective evaluation. More recently other scores have been designed to focus on clinical risk assessment and to improve the selection of patients for clinical and interventional procedures.
Despite the presence of many validation studies confirming the validity of GRACE and TIMI in multiple clinical settings, to our knowledge there has been no meta-analysis to systematically compare their discriminatory performance. We therefore aimed to undertake a systematic review to assess ACS risk evaluation scores in order to determine the most accurately performing.
Section snippets
Methods
Current guidelines, including the recent Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) amendment to the Quality of Reporting of Meta-analyses (QUOROM) statement, as well as recommendations from The Cochrane Collaboration and Meta-analysis Of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) were followed during the course of this work [6], [7], [8], [9], [10].
Results
Data search and study selection are summarized in Fig. 1.
Discussion
The most important findings of our meta-analysis are: a) There is a striking difference in the rates of patients undergoing invasive revascularization between derivation and validation studies, b) TIMI and GRACE risk scores are the only scores which have been validated in all types of ACS, with the GRACE score performing better, c) many other risk scores, which show good performance in a derivation cohort, have not yet been evaluated in validation cohorts.
Derivation and validation studies
Conclusions
TIMI and GRACE are the risk scores that up until now have been most extensively investigated, with GRACE performing better. There are other potentially useful ACS risk scores available however these have not undergone rigorous validation. This study suggests that these other scores may be potentially useful and should be further researched.
Disclosures
None.
References (78)
- et al.
Comparison of mortality rates in women versus men presenting with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction
Am J Cardiol
(2011) - et al.
Transferring patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction for mechanical reperfusion: a meta-regression analysis of randomized trials
Ann Emerg Med
(2008) - et al.
Improving the quality of reports of meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials: the QUOROM statement. Quality of Reporting of Meta-analyses
Lancet
(1999) - et al.
Chest pain presenting to the Emergency Department–to stratify risk with GRACE or TIMI?
Resuscitation
(2007) - et al.
New risk score for patients with acute chest pain, non-ST-segment deviation, and normal troponin concentrations: a comparison with the TIMI risk score
J Am Coll Cardiol
(2005) - et al.
Comparison of thrombolysis in myocardial infarction, global registry of acute coronary events, and acute physiology and chronic health evaluation II risk scores in patients with acute myocardial infarction who require mechanical ventilation for more than 24 hours
Am J Cardiol
(2011) - et al.
Evaluating the performance of the Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events risk-adjustment index across socioeconomic strata among patients
Am Heart J
(Feb. 2006) - et al.
Canadian Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events (GRACE/GRACE(2)) Investigators. Validation of the Global Registry of Acute Coronary Event (GRACE) risk score for in-hospital mortality in patients with acute coronary syndrome in Canada
Am Heart J
(2009) - et al.
Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events (GRACE) hospital discharge risk score accurately predicts long-term mortality post acute coronary syndrome
Am Heart J
(2007) - et al.
Usefulness of biomarker strategy to improve GRACE score's prediction performance in patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome and low event rates
Am J Cardiol
(2010)