Coronary angiographic scoring systems: an evaluation of their equivalence and validity

冠状动脉造影评分系统:等效性和有效性评价

阅读:1

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Multiple scoring systems have been devised to quantify angiographic coronary artery disease (CAD) burden, but it is unclear how these scores relate to each other and which scores are most accurate. The aim of this study was to compare coronary angiographic scoring systems (1) with each other and (2) with intravascular ultrasound (IVUS)-derived plaque burden in a population undergoing angiographic evaluation for CAD. METHODS: Coronary angiographic data from 3600 patients were scored using 10 commonly used angiographic scoring systems and interscore correlations were calculated. In a subset of 50 patients, plaque burden and plaque area in the left anterior descending coronary artery were quantified using IVUS and correlated with angiographic scores. RESULTS: All angiographic scores correlated with each other (range for Spearman coefficient [ρ] 0.79-0.98, P < .0001); the 2 most widely used scores, Gensini and CASS-70, had a ρ = 0.90 (P < .0001). All scores correlated significantly with average plaque burden and plaque area by IVUS (range ρ 0.56-0.78, P < .0001 and 0.43-0.62, P < .01, respectively). The CASS-50 score had the strongest correlation (ρ 0.78 and 0.62, P < .0001) and the Duke Jeopardy score the weakest correlation (ρ 0.56 and 0.43, P < .01) with plaque burden and area, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Angiographic scoring systems are strongly correlated with each other and with atherosclerotic plaque burden. Scoring systems therefore appear to be a valid estimate of CAD plaque burden.

特别声明

1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。

2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。

3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。

4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。