RESULTS: Lung ultrasound was performed within 24 h of admission in a multicentre cohort of 373 patients admitted for STEMI. In-hospital mortality and major adverse cardiovascular events within one year after admission, comprising mortality or readmission for HF, acute coronary syndrome, or stroke, were analysed. When predicting in-hospital mortality, the global comparison of these three classifications was statistically significant: Killip pLUS area under the curve (AUC) 0.90 (95% CI 0.85-0.95) vs. Killip AUC 0.85 (95% CI 0.73-0.96) vs. LUCK 0.83 (95% CI 0.70-0.95), P = 0.024. To predict events during follow-up, the comparison between scales was also significant: Killip pLUS 0.77 (95% CI 0.71-0.85) vs. Killip 0.72 (95% CI 0.65-0.79) vs. LUCK 0.73 (95% CI 0.66-0.81), P = 0.033.
CONCLUSIONS: The Killip pLUS scale provides enhanced risk stratification compared to the Killip and LUCK scales while preserving simplicity.
结果:在373例STEMI患者的多中心队列中,在入院24小时内进行了LUS检查。入院后一年内的住院死亡率和主要不良心血管事件(MACE),包括死亡率或心力衰竭(HF)的再入院,急性冠脉综合征,或中风,进行了分析。在预测住院死亡率时,这三种分类的全球比较具有统计学意义:KillippLUSAUC0.90(95%CI0.85-0.95)与KillipAUC0.85(95%CI0.73-0.96)与运气0.83(95%CI0.70-0.95),p=0.024。为了预测随访期间的事件,量表之间的比较也有统计学意义:KillippLUS0.77(95%CI0.71-0.85)与基利普0.72(95%CI0.65-0-79)与运气0.73(95%CI0.66-0.81),p=0.033。
结论:与Killip和LUCK量表相比,KillippLUS量表提供了增强的风险分层,同时保持了简单性。