Full Movie trailer gotti | fl studios download free | Adobe Audition CC

Comparative study between elderly and younger patients with acute coronary syndrome

Comparative study between elderly and younger patients with acute coronary syndrome

The Egyptian Journal of Critical Care Medicine (2015) 3, 69–75 The Egyptian College of Critical Care Physicians The Egyptian Journal of Critical Car...

930KB Sizes 0 Downloads 6 Views

Recommend Documents

Frailty predicts major bleeding within 30 days in elderly patients with Acute Coronary Syndrome
Bleeding in ACS patients is an independent marker of adverse outcomes. Its prognostic impact is even worse in elderly po

Long-term major adverse cardiovascular events and quality of life after coronary angiography in elderly patients with acute coronary syndrome
Although the elderly comprise the majority of acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients, limited data exist on major advers

The risk profile of patients with acute coronary syndrome treated at IKEM between 2006 and 2013
The proportion and, possibly, also the relevance of some cardiovascular risk factors at the population level are changin

Association between PDW and Long Term Major Adverse Cardiac Events in Patients with Acute Coronary Syndrome
The aim of the present study was to perform a preliminary evaluation of the potential association between platelet distr

The Egyptian Journal of Critical Care Medicine (2015) 3, 69–75

The Egyptian College of Critical Care Physicians

The Egyptian Journal of Critical Care Medicine http://ees.elsevier.com/ejccm www.sciencedirect.com

ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Comparative study between elderly and younger patients with acute coronary syndrome Mohammed Obaya *, Moemen Yehia, Lamiaa Hamed, Alia Abdel Fattah Critical Care Department, Cairo University, Egypt Received 1 October 2015; revised 14 November 2015; accepted 10 December 2015 Available online 22 December 2015

KEYWORDS ACS; CAD; Risk factors; Smoking; Dyslipidemia; Coronary angiography

Abstract Background: Acute coronary syndrome (ACS), one of the commonest causes of ICU admission, casts a large burden of cost on the health care system, with a huge mortality in the elderly, in Egypt and worldwide. Objectives: Comparative study between elderly and younger patients with acute coronary syndrome in the last 4 years in the Critical Care department, Cairo University. Patients: The population of the study included 570 patients who were admitted to the Critical Care department, Cairo University with ACS (between January 2011 and February 2015). Patients were divided into two groups: (1) Elderly P 60 year. (2) Younger < 60 year. Methods: Data collection focused on patients’ demographics; risk factors for CAD, PCI indications; baseline cardiac status & associated medical conditions; angiographic & PCI procedure and clinical success of PCI. Results: Dyslipidemia, hypertension and diabetes were the most significant risk factors for ACS in elderly (p < 0.001), while smoking was the most significant risk factor in younger patients (p < 0.001). Predictors of heart failure were age and TIMI score. Being elderly increases odds ratio of heart failure by 3.154 times, (P value .035), also increases in TIMI score increase the incidence of heart failure by 0.825 times, (P value <.001). Mortality was frequent in elderly than younger, (P value = 0.002). Conclusion: Dyslipidemia, hypertension and diabetes were the most frequent risk factors for CAD in elderly, while smoking was the most frequent risk factor in younger patients. Mortality was more frequent in elderly than younger. Complications were more frequent in elderly than younger. A predictor of Heart failure was an increase in both age and TIMI score. Ó 2015 The Egyptian College of Critical Care Physicians. Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

* Corresponding author. Peer review under responsibility of The Egyptian College of Critical Care Physicians.

Production and hosting by Elsevier

1. Introduction Acute coronary syndrome (ACS), one of the commonest causes of intensive care unit (ICU) admission, casts a large burden of cost on the health care system, along with a huge mortality in the elderly population [1], both in Egypt and

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejccm.2015.12.002 2090-7303 Ó 2015 The Egyptian College of Critical Care Physicians. Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

70

M. Obaya et al.

worldwide [2]. Patient registries (PRs) are organized systems using observational study methods to collect uniform data to evaluate specified outcomes for a population defined by a particular disease with predetermined scientific, clinical, or policy purposes. Furthermore, the information they provide is sometimes used in clinical guidelines to establish the range of benefit or harm of interventions [3].

5.2. Secondary outcome There was no statistical significant difference between the studied groups with regards to secondary outcome, except for heart failure P value <0.001 and arrhythmia (AF) P value 0.002. See Table 3. 5.3. Complications

2. Objective Our aim was to evaluate the outcome of acute coronary syndrome patients admitted in Critical Care department, Cairo University in a retrospective registry, with a special emphasis on patient’s demographics, risk factors, clinical presentation, in hospital mortality rate, reperfusion strategy and complications upon follow-up in the two main groups (younger and elderly patients). 3. Patient and methods The population of the study included 570 patients who were admitted to the Critical Care department, Cairo University with ACS (between January 2011 and February 2015).  Patient’s data were retrieved through reviewing the electronic health record database [Medica Plus].  Patients were divided into two groups: 1. Elderly P 60 year. 2. Younger < 60 year.

There was a statistical significant difference between the study groups with regards to pulmonary edema, cardiogenic shock, cardiac arrest and post MI angina with values 0.041, <0.001, 0.004 and 0.047, respectively. See Fig. 2. 5.4. Diagnosis There was a statistical significant difference between the studied groups with regards to the prevalence of acute coronary syndrome (STEMI, NSTEMI, UA); P value <0.001. See Table 4. 5.5. Killip classification There was a statistical significant difference between the studied groups with regards to Killip classification, P value <0.001. See Fig. 3 5.6. Reperfusion data

4. Results

There was a statistical significant difference between the studied groups with regards to coronary intervention, P value 0.012. See Table 5.

4.1. Demographic data (Age and sex)

5.7. Primary PCI

There was a statistical significant difference between the studied groups with regards to age and sex, P value <.001. Males were more likely to get ACS than Females. See Table 1

There was a statistical significant difference between the studied groups with regards to primary PCI, P value 0.012. See Table 6.

5. Risk factors

5.8. Medications used

There was a statistically significant difference between the studied groups with regards to smoking, diabetes, hypertension and dyslipidemia (P value <0.001, 0.003, 0.001, 0.001, respectively) See Fig. 1.

There was no statistical significant difference between the studied groups with regards to medications, except for GP IIb/IIIa and vasoactive drugs. There were statistical significant differences between the studied groups with P values 0.024 and 0.012 respectively. See Table 7.

5.1. In hospital mortality 5.9. Predictors of heart failure There was a statistical significant difference between the studied groups with regards to in hospital mortality, P value 0.002. See Table 2. Table 1

Multivariate regression analysis showed that only age and TIMI score were predictors of heart failure. Being elderly

Age and sex frequency and mean for age in each group. Age groups

Age (Years) (Mean ± SD) Sex Female Male

Elderly

Younger

66.8 ± 6.2 71 (32.3%) 149 (67.7%)

51.2 ± 7.7 61 (17.4%) 289 (82.6%)

t/v2

P value

t = 25.348 v2 = 16.72

<0.001 <0.001

Comparative study of acute coronary syndrome

Frequency of risk factors in each group.

Figure 1

Table 2

Count and frequency of death in each group. Age groups

Death

Table 3

71

No Yes

Elderly Count (%)

Younger Count (%)

211 (95.9%) 9 (4.1%)

347 (99.1%) 3 (0.9%)

FE

P value

10.4

0.002

Table 4 Frequency of acute coronary syndrome (UA, STEMI, and NSTEMI) in studied groups. v2 test

Age groups Elderly

P value

Younger

Diagnosis UA 74 (33.6%) 113 (32.3%) v2 = 16.6 <0.001 STEMI 72 (32.7%) 148 (42.3%) NSTEMI 74 (33.6%) 89 (25.4%)

Frequency of secondary outcome in each group. Age groups

Heart failure Arrhythmias

No Yes AF

Elderly Count (%)

Younger Count (%)

151 (68.6%) 69 (31.4%) 17 (7.7%)

294 (84.0%) 56 (16.0%) 8 (2.3%)

v2

P value

18.62

<0.001

9.53

0.002

Receiver operator characteristics (ROC) curve was calculated for the use of Age and TIMI score as predictors of heart failure. The area under curve (AUC) for age was 83.2% and for TIMI score was 78.3%, P value <0.001. The optimal cut-off value to predict heart failure was 55.5 years for age and 2.5 for TIMI score. See Table 9 and Fig. 4. 6. Discussion

increases odds ratio of heart failure by 3.154 times, (HR: 3.154, P value .035). Also increases in TIMI score increase the incidence of heart failure by 0.825 times, (HR: 0.825, P value <.001). See Table 8.

Figure 2

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is now the leading cause of death, both in Egypt and worldwide, placing a great strain on the world’s health systems [2].

Frequency of complications in studied group.

72

M. Obaya et al.

Figure 3

Table 5

Killip classification frequency in each group.

Reperfusion data in studied groups. Age groups

Cath related data

Coronary intervention

No Yes 0 1 2 3 BMS DES Both No Yes No Yes

TIMI flow

Type of stent

CABG Thrombolytics

Table 6

v2

Primary PCI

No Yes

Elderly Count (%)

Younger Count (%)

143 (65.0%) 77 (35.0%)

190 (54.3%) 160 (45.7%)

6.38

Younger Count (%)

29 (13.2%) 191 (86.8%) 1 (.9%) 0 (.0%) 5 (4.4%) 108 (94.7%) 69 (68.3%) 28 (27.7%) 4 (4.0%) 186 (84.5%) 34 (15.5%) 215 (97.7%) 5 (2.3%)

24 (6.9%) 326 (93.1%) 3 (1.5%) 1 (.5%) 11 (5.6%) 181 (91.9%) 127 (77.4%) 31 (18.9%) 6 (3.7%) 313 (89.4%) 37 (10.6%) 332 (95.1%) 17 (4.9%)

Table 7 group.

Primary PCI frequency in studied groups. Group

Elderly Count (%)

v2 = 6.41

0.012

FE = 1.52

0.976

FE = 2.96

0.221

v2 = 2.95

0.086

FE = 2.45

0.117

Age groups

GP IIb/IIIa Vasoactive

In our registry the mean age for elderly vs. younger was (66.8 ± 6.2 years vs. 51.2 ± 7.7 years, p value <0.001) years. Our results for elderly were similar to previous registries, including the GRACE registry in which Granger CB. et al. found that the mean age for elderly was 66.3 years, also Puymirat & Co-workers found that the mean age in his registry (Euro Heart survey) was 66 ± 13 years [4,5]. Our results for the mean age in younger patients were concordant with the Gulf Registry of Acute Coronary Events (Gulf RACE), in which Zubaid et al. found that the mean age was (55 years) [6].

P value

GP IIb/IIIa and vasoactive drugs taken in each

P value

0.012

v2/FE

No Yes No Yes

Elderly Count (%)

Younger Count (%)

127 (57.7%) 93 (42.3%) 183 (83.2%) 37 (16.8%)

168 (48.0%) 182 (52.0%) 316 (90.3%) 34 (9.7%)

v2

P value

5.12

0.024

6.25

0.012

Our study showed that ACS occurs predominantly in males (elderly vs. younger was 67.7% vs. 82.6%, P value <0.001), while ACS frequency in females was in elderly with almost double the frequency in younger patients (32.3% vs. 17.4%), that was concordant with the National Registry of Myocardial Infarction (NRMI) which shows that ACS frequency is much more for women over 60 years than for those below 60 years (32.3% vs.16%) [7].

Comparative study of acute coronary syndrome Table 8

73

Predictors of heart failure.

Variable

Hazard risk (HR)

P value

Age group Diabetes Hypertension ST resolution LVED LVES TIMI score

3.154 1.091 1.499 0.962 0.853 0.113 0.825

.035 .716 .389 .931 .144 .821 <.001

Table 9

Best predictors of heart failure.

Age TIMI score

AUC

P value

Cut-off

Sens.

Spec.

83.2% 78.3%

<.001 <.001

55.5 2.5

71.2% 87.2%

45.6% 53.9%

Figure 4

Roc curve for age and TIMI score.

In our registry, regarding hypertension in elderly vs. younger (65% vs. 49.1%, P value <0.001), we have more incidence of hypertension than the GULF registry (46%) but nearly similar to GRACE (57.8%), and less than ACTION registry (68%) and PACIFIC registry (72.7%) [6,8]. In our study, dyslipidemia was the most common risk factor for elderly (96.8%). This result was discordant with Avezum et al. (GRACE registry) which stated that dyslipidemia in elderly was (35%) [9]. Our study results showed that DM frequency in the elderly vs. younger was (53.2% vs. 39.4%, p value = 0.003), this was significantly higher than that encountered in GRACE (23.3%), ACTION (29.5%), EHS (24%) and PACIFIC (35%) registries [10,11,5,8]. In our study smoking was the predominant risk factor in younger patients (58.9%), our results were concordant with The Thai ACS registry which found smoking frequency in young patients (65.9%) [12]. Our results were higher than the 36.6% seen in the Gulf RACE registry [13]. In our study in hospital mortality rate was higher in elderly than younger (4.1% vs. 0.9%, P value = 0.002), which was

discordant with Granger et al. collected data from GRACE who found their overall mortality to be 10.8% [4], also discordant with our results The Thai ACS registry found that mortality rate was 14.1% [12]. Also previous studies have indicated that the rate of in-hospital mortality is lower in young ACS patients [14,4], our results were concordant with The Gulf Registry of Acute Coronary Events (Gulf RACE) which found that the mortality rate was (5.3%) [13]. In our study, heart failure was significantly higher in the elder group than the younger group (31.4% vs. 16%, P value <0.001). These results were discordant with Philippe Gabriel Steg, for the Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events (GRACE) Investigators, who found that HF frequency in ACS is 12% [4]. In our study, the elderly group has a higher frequency of complications than younger where pulmonary edema was (18.2% vs. 12%, P value = 0.041), cardiogenic shock was (19.1% vs. 7.7%, P value <0.001) and cardiac arrest was (8.1% vs. 3.2%, p value = 0.004). Our results were higher than that for Thai ACS registry which found that in elderly, the frequency of cardiogenic shock was 9.6% and cardiac arrest 3.8% [12]. In our study post MI angina in the younger group was 2% while in the elderly group was none. These results were discordant with The Gulf Registry of Acute Coronary Events (Gulf RACE) which found that post MI angina frequency was higher in the young (13.4%) [6]. In our study, STEMI was more frequent in younger patients than elderly (42.3% vs. 32.7%, P value <0.001), NSTEMI was more frequent in elderly patients than younger (33.6% vs. 25.4%, P value <0.001), our results were concordant with Mehta et al. who found that STEMI accounted only for 30% of all elderly patients admitted with ACS [15]. But our results for frequency of STEMI in younger patients were higher than the observations of Avezum et al. from the Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events (GRACE) which were 35% [4]. Our results were concordant with other previous studies which found that STEMI was more frequent in the young patients, whereas NSTEMI was more frequent in the elderly [9,12,16,17]. In the present study, younger patients were significantly more likely to have Killip class I (81.4%) which were concordant with the results of Schoenenberger et al. [17] who found that 95% of their patients presented with class I Killip classification [17]. While in our study elderly patients were significantly more likely to have Killip class II (20%), III (7.3%) and IV (12.7%), p value <0.001. which were concordant with Avezum et al. GRACE Investigators, who found that frequency of Killip class P II ranging between (15% and 23%). This was reported also in other national registries [4]. Regarding primary PCI, our study results showed that primary PCI in younger patients vs. elderly is (45.7% vs. 35%), P value = 0.012. Our results for young were concordant with Thai ACS registry which found that frequency of primary PCI in young patients was 41.9% which was also similar to that reported by the CREATE registry [12,18]. Our results were discordant with the GULF registry in which Zubaid M found that primary PCI was done in 7% only [6]. On the other side we had less incidence of Primary PCI than the ACTION registry in which Roe et al. found that 83% underwent primary PCI, also we have less incidence than GRACE (58%) registry [11,4].

74 In our study, among patients who underwent PCI restoring TIMI III flow was achieved in 94.7% and 91.9% in elderly and younger respectively. Our procedural success rates were concordant with those of Shaikh et al. who found that PCI success rate was 97% and Prashanth et al. who stated that the angiographic and procedural success rate was 98% and 95% respectively [19,20]. Our success rate was higher than that of Buller et al. in the Occluded Artery Trial who found that successful PCI procedures were 87% [21]. In the present study, both groups received thrombolytic therapy. While it was less common in elderly group vs. younger (2.3% vs. 4.9%), this did not reach statistical significance, p value = 0.117. Our results were discordant with the EHS in which Puymirat et al. found that 21% received thrombolytics, GULF registry in which Zubaid found that 77% received thrombolytics and GRACE in which Fox et al. found that 50% of STEMI patients received thrombolytics [6,5,22]. Coronary intervention was the reperfusion strategy of choice in our registry. This is mainly because our department is considered a tertiary referral center that is equipped with 24 h PCI facility with a well-trained team having more than 25 years of experience. That is why we have a significantly lower incidence of thrombolytic. In our study regarding glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors younger patients received more than elderly patients (52% vs. 42.3%), P value = 0.024. Our results were similar to Thai ACS registry which found that the frequency of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa was higher in young patients vs. elderly (32.4% vs. 9%) [12]. This practice has been noted also in SPACE registry which found that glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors were less used in elderly [23], recent studies such as CRUSADE [24], TACTICS-TIMI 18 [25] and GRACE [9] have documented a significantly lower use of evidence-based therapies in the elderly including GP IIb/IIIa inhibitors. In our study vasoactive drugs were commonly used by elderly patients more than younger patients (16.8% vs. 9.7%), P value = 0.012. This can be explained by the fact that cardiogenic shock is higher in elderly 19.1% than in younger patients 7.7%. In our study we found that one of the predictors of HF complicating ACS was older age, in our study elderly increases odds ratio of heart failure by 3.154 times, (HR: 3.154, P value .035), that was consistent between our study and (SPACE) registry which showed that heart failure increased with increase age (p < 0.001) [23]. Also our results were concordant with those of Rocha et al. who showed that increases in age of ACS patients predict HF and increase odds ratio of heart failure by 1.04 times [26]. Truong et al. showed that TIMI score predicts heart failure in patients with ACS [HR 4.13, p < .0001] [27], this is concordant with our study which showed that increases in TIMI score increase the incidence of heart failure by 0.825 times, (HR 0.825, P value <.001), Our results were also concordant with those of He´ctor Gonza´lez-Pacheco, et al. who showed that increased TIMI score predicts heart failure in patients with ACS and increases odds ratio of heart failure by 4.2 times, p value 0.0001 [28]. 7. Conclusion 1. Acute coronary syndrome is more prevalent in male population in elderly and younger patients.

M. Obaya et al. 2. Dyslipidemia, hypertension and diabetes were the most frequent risk factors for CAD in elderly patients while smoking was the most frequent risk factors for CAD in younger patients. 3. In hospital mortality was more frequent in elderly than younger. 4. Heart failure was more frequent in elderly patients than younger. 5. Killip class I was more frequent in younger patients while Killip class P II was more frequent in elderly patients. 6. A Predictor of heart failure was an increase in both age and TIMI score. 7. Primary PCI is the reperfusion strategy of choice in STEMI patients in our department, but used more frequently in younger patients than elderly. 8. Our success rate of PCI procedures matches the international rates for both younger and elderly patients. 9. Glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors were received by younger patients more than elderly patients, while vasoactive drugs were used more in elderly than younger patients.

7.1. Recommendation 1. There is an urgent need for a national prevention program as well as a systematic improvement in the care for patients with ACS including a system of care for STEMI patients. 2. More effort should be directed toward early detection and better control of risk factors. 3. There is a need for prevention programs to control smoking by targeting young adults. 4. For older patients there is a need to identify medical as well as social factors that influence the therapeutic management plans. 5. Healthy life styles should be encouraged beginning from young ages and new precautions about smoking must be taken (smoking campaigns).

7.2. Limitations for the work The number of patients with age 6 40 years was only 25 patients from 570 patients (total study patients) so it was difficult to compare this small group to other study patients. Conflict of interest None declared. References [1] Paudel R, Panta OB, Paudel B, et al. Acute coronary syndrome in elderly – the difference compared with young in intensive care unit of a tertiary hospital in western Nepal. J Clin Diag Res 2009 February;2(3):1289–96. [2] Safavi K et al. Implementation of a registry for acute coronary syndrome in resources-limited settings: barriers and opportunities. Asia Pac J Public Health 2010;22(3 Suppl.):90S–5S. [3] Tricoci P et al. Scientific evidence underlying the ACC/AHA clinical practice guidelines. JAMA 2009;301(8):831–41.

Comparative study of acute coronary syndrome [4] Granger CB, Goldberg RJ, Dabbous O, et al. Global registry of acute coronary events investigators. Predictors of hospital mortality in the global registry of acute Coronary Events. Arch Intern Med 2003;163:2345–53. [5] Puymirat E et al. Euro Heart Survey 2009 Snapshot: regional variations in presentation and management of patients with AMI in 47 countries. Eur Heart J Acute Cardiovasc Care 2013;2 (4):359–70. [6] Zubaid M. Clinical presentation and outcomes of acute coronary syndromes in the gulf registry of acute coronary events (Gulf RACE). Saudi Med J 2008;29(2):251–5. [7] Imazio M, Bobbio M, Bergerone S, et al. Clinical and epidemiological characteristics of juvenile myocardial infarction in Italy: the GISSI experience. G Ital Cardiol 1998;28:505–12. [8] Daida H et al. Management and two-year long-term clinical outcome of acute coronary syndrome in Japan: prevention of atherothrombotic incidents following ischemic coronary attack (PACIFIC) registry. Circ J 2013;77(4):934–43. [9] Avezum A, Makdisse M, Spencer F, et al. Impact of age on management and outcome of acute coronary syndrome: observations from the Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events (GRACE). Am Heart J 2005;149:67–73. [10] Goldberg RJ, Currie K, White K, et al. Six-month outcomes in a multinational registry of patients hospitalized with an acute coronary syndrome (the Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events [GRACE]). Am J Cardiol 2004;93:288–93. [11] Chin CT, Chen AY, Wang TY, et al. Risk adjustment for inhospital mortality of contemporary patients with acute myocardial infarction: the acute coronary treatment and intervention outcomes network (ACTION) registry-get with the guidelines (GWTG) acute myocardial infarction mortality model and risk score. Am Heart J 2011;161:113–22. [12] Tungsubutra W, Tresukosol D, Buddhari W, et al. Thai ACS Registry. Acute coronary syndrome in young adults: the Thai ACS Registry. J Med Assoc Thai 2007;90:81–90. [13] The Gulf Registry of Acute Coronary Events (Gulf RACE): clinical presentation and outcomes of acute coronary syndromes. Saudi Med J 2008;29:251–5. [14] Ergelen M, Uyarel H, Gorgulu S, et al. Comparison of outcomes in young versus nonyoung patients with ST elevation myocardial infarction treated by primary angioplasty. Coron Artery Dis 2010;21:72–7. [15] Mehta RH, Rathore SS, Radford MJ, et al. Acute myocardial infarction in the elderly: differences by age. J Am Coll Cardiol 2001;38:736–41. [16] Colkesen AY, Acil T, Demircan S, Sezgin AT, et al. Coronary lesion type, location, and characteristics of acute ST elevation

75

[17]

[18]

[19]

[20]

[21]

[22]

[23]

[24]

[25]

[26]

[27]

[28]

myocardial infarction in young adults under 35 years of age. Coron Artery Dis 2008;19:345–7. Schoenenberger AW, Radovanovic D, Stauffer JC, et al. Acute coronary syndromes in young patients: presentation, treatment and outcome. Int J Cardiol 2009;35, 733–625. Xavier D. Treatment and outcomes of acute coronary syndromes in India (CREATE): a prospective analysis of registry data. Lancet 2008;371:1435–42. Shaikh AH et al. Outcomes of primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in a tertiary care cardiac centre. J Pak Med Assoc 2009;59(7):426–9. Prashanth P et al. Immediate and six-month clinical outcome of percutaneous coronary intervention in a Tertiary Hospital in the Sultanate of Oman. Oman Med J 2008;23(4):247–52. Buller CE et al. Percutaneous coronary intervention in the Occluded Artery Trial: procedural success, hazard, and outcomes over 5 years. Am Heart J 2009;158(3):408–15. Fox KA et al. Management of acute coronary syndromes. Variations in practice and outcome; findings from the Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events (GRACE). Euro Heart J 2002;23(15):1177–89. AlHabib KF, Hersi A, AlFaleh H, et al. Baseline characteristics, management practices, and in-hospital outcomes of patients with acute coronary syndromes: results of the Saudi Project for Assessment of Coronary Events (SPACE) registry. J Saudi Heart Assoc 2011. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jsha.2011.05.004. Alexander KP, Roe MT, Chen AY, et al. Evolution in cardiovascular care for elderly patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes: results from the CRUSADE National Quality Improvement Initiative. J Am Coll Cardiol 2005:1479–87. Cannon CP, Weintraub WS, Demopoulos LA, et al. Comparison of early invasive and conservative strategies in patients with unstable coronary syndromes treated with the glycoprotein IIb/ IIIa inhibitor tirofiban. N Engl J Med 2001;344:1879–87. Rocha S, Nabais S, Magalha˜es S, et al. Heart failure after acute coronary syndrome: identify to treat better. Rev Port Cardiol 2007;26(4):349–59 [English, Portuguese]. Truong QA, Cannon CP, Zakai NA, et al. Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) risk index predicts long-term mortality and heart failure in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction in the TIMI 2 clinical trial. Am Heart J 2009;157:673–9. Gonza´lez-Pacheco He´ctor et al. The TIMI risk score for STEMI predicts in-hospital mortality and adverse events in patients without cardiogenic shock undergoing primary angioplasty. Arch Cardiol Mex 2012;82(1):7–13.