The TIMI risk score for unstable angina/non-ST elevation MI: A method for prognostication and therapeutic decision making

2.8kCitations
Citations of this article
699Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Context: Patients with unstable angina/non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (MI) (UA/NSTEMI) present with a wide spectrum of risk for death and cardiac ischemic events. Objective: To develop a simple risk score that has broad applicability, is easily calculated at patient presentation, does not require a computer, and identifies patients with different responses to treatments for UA/NSTEMI. Design, Setting, and Patients: Two phase 3, international, randomized, double-blind trials (the Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction [TIMI] 11 B trial [August 1996-March 1998] and the Efficacy and Safety of Subcutaneous Enoxaparin in Unstable Angina and Non-Q-Wave MI trial [ESSENCE; October 1994-May 1996]). A total of 1957 patients with UA/NSTEMI were assigned to receive unfractionated heparin (test cohort) and 1953 to receive enoxaparin in TIMI 11B; 1564 and 1607 were assigned respectively in ESSENCE. The 3 validation cohorts were the unfractionated heparin group from ESSENCE and both enoxaparin groups. Main Outcome Measures: The TIMI risk score was derived in the test cohort by selection of independent prognostic variables using multivariate logistic regression, assignment of value of 1 when a factor was present and 0 when it was absent, and summing the number of factors present to categorize patients into risk strata. Relative differences in response to therapeutic interventions were determined by comparing the slopes of the rates of events with increasing score in treatment groups and by testing for an interaction between risk score and treatment. Outcomes were TIMI risk score for developing at least 1 component of the primary end point (all-cause mortality, new or recurrent MI, or severe recurrent ischemia requiring urgent revascularization) through 14 days after randomization. Results: The 7 TIMI risk score predictor variables were age 65 years or older, at least 3 risk factors for coronary artery disease, prior coronary stenosis of 50% or more, ST-segment deviation on electrocardiogram at presentation, at least 2 anginal events in prior 24 hours, use of aspirin in prior 7 days, and elevated serum cardiac markers. Event rates increased significantly as the TIMI risk score increased in the test cohort in TIMI 11B: 4.7% for a score of 0/1; 8.3% for 2; 13.2% for 3; 19.9% for 4; 26.2% for 5; and 40.9% for 6/7 (P

References Powered by Scopus

The meaning and use of the area under a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve

17869Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Inhibition of platelet glycoprotein IIb/IIIa with eptifibatide in patients with acute coronary syndromes

1749Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Cardiac-specific troponin I levels to predict the risk of mortality in patients with acute coronary syndromes

1579Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Cited by Powered by Scopus

Prasugrel versus clopidogrel in patients with acute coronary syndromes

6087Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

2015 ESC Guidelines for the management of acute coronary syndromes in patients presenting without persistent st-segment elevation: Task force for the management of acute coronary syndromes in patients presenting without persistent ST-segment elevation of the european society of cardiology (ESC)

5081Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

ESC Guidelines for the management of acute coronary syndromes in patients presenting without persistent ST-segment elevation

3195Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Antman, E. M., Cohen, M., Bernink, P. J. L. M., McCabe, C. H., Horacek, T., Papuchis, G., … Braunwald, E. (2000). The TIMI risk score for unstable angina/non-ST elevation MI: A method for prognostication and therapeutic decision making. Journal of the American Medical Association, 284(7), 835–842. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.284.7.835

Readers over time

‘08‘09‘10‘11‘12‘13‘14‘15‘16‘17‘18‘19‘20‘21‘22‘23‘24‘250255075100

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 220

55%

Researcher 116

29%

Professor / Associate Prof. 45

11%

Lecturer / Post doc 20

5%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Medicine and Dentistry 392

90%

Computer Science 18

4%

Agricultural and Biological Sciences 15

3%

Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceut... 11

3%

Article Metrics

Tooltip
Mentions
Blog Mentions: 2
News Mentions: 2
References: 6
Social Media
Shares, Likes & Comments: 23

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free
0