Objective To investigate the predictive value of age, creatinine and ejection fraction (ACEF) II score for the incidence of major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCEs) in patients with coronary heart disease (CHD) after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).
Methods A total of 445 patients with CHD who underwent PCI were consecutively enrolled. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was used to analyse the power of the ACEF II score in predicting MACCE. Kaplan-Meier survival curves and log-rank tests were chosen for survival analysis of adverse prognosis between groups. Finally, multivariate Cox proportional risk regression analysis was used to investigate independent risk factors for MACCEs in patients with CHD after PCI.
Results There was a significantly higher incidence of MACCEs in patients with high ACEF II scores. The area under the ROC curve of ACEF II score was 0.718, suggesting it had ideal predictive value for MACCE risks. The ACEF II score had a best cut-off value of 1.461 (sensitivity 79.4%, specificity 53.7%). Survival analysis indicated that patients in the high-score group had a significantly lower cumulative MACCE-free survival rate. Multivariate Cox regression analysis showed that ACEF II scores ≥1.461, Gensini scores ≥61.5, age, cardiac troponin I and previous PCI were independent risk factors of MACCE in patients with CHD after PCI, while the utilisation of statins was an independent protective factor.
Conclusions The ACEF II score has an ideal capacity for risk stratification in patients with CHD undergoing PCI and offers good predictive value for MACCE in the long term.
- Coronary heart disease
Data availability statement
Data are available on reasonable request. Not applicable.
Statistics from Altmetric.com
SW, ZQ and YL contributed equally.
Contributors SW, ZQ and YL performed the study and wrote the manuscript. XW, TG, JX and SL conducted the statistical analysis. XZ designed the study and revised the manuscript.
Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.
Competing interests None declared.
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.