TY - JOUR
T1 - An Evaluation of the CHADS(2) Stroke Risk Score in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation Who Undergo Percutaneous Coronary Revascularization
AU - Ruiz-Nodar, JM
AU - Marin, F
AU - Manzano-Fernandez, S
AU - Valencia-Martin, J
AU - Hurtado, JA
AU - Roldan, V
AU - Pineda, J
AU - Pinar, E
AU - Sogorb, F
AU - Valdes, M
AU - Lip, Gregory
PY - 2011/6/1
Y1 - 2011/6/1
N2 - Background: There are various schemas designed to stratify the risk of thromboembofism (TE) in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF), of which the CHADS(2) (congestive heart failure, hypertension, age >= 75 y, diabetes, stroke [doubled]) score is the most widely studied. We evaluated whether the CHADS(2) score was adequate for TE risk stratification while assessing cardiac risk in patients with AF revascularized with coronary artery stents.
Methods: We reviewed 604 consecutive patients with AF treated with at least one stent between 2001 and 2008 in relation to TE risk using CHADS(2) score. We stratified our patients with a CHADS(2) score 1 as high risk (and, hence, requiring anticoagulation; group 2: n = 411, 68%). We determined the benefits and/or risks of oral anticoagulation (OAC) therapy in both cohorts.
Results: Completed follow-up was achieved in 90.4% (mean 642.2 days). Group 1 event-free survival was better than group 2 (major adverse cardiovascular events [MACEs], log-rank test P =.03; and death, log-rank test P =.03). In group 1, event-free survival was better on OAC vs non-OAC use (death 5% vs 15%, P =.04; MACE 10% vs 26%, P
AB - Background: There are various schemas designed to stratify the risk of thromboembofism (TE) in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF), of which the CHADS(2) (congestive heart failure, hypertension, age >= 75 y, diabetes, stroke [doubled]) score is the most widely studied. We evaluated whether the CHADS(2) score was adequate for TE risk stratification while assessing cardiac risk in patients with AF revascularized with coronary artery stents.
Methods: We reviewed 604 consecutive patients with AF treated with at least one stent between 2001 and 2008 in relation to TE risk using CHADS(2) score. We stratified our patients with a CHADS(2) score 1 as high risk (and, hence, requiring anticoagulation; group 2: n = 411, 68%). We determined the benefits and/or risks of oral anticoagulation (OAC) therapy in both cohorts.
Results: Completed follow-up was achieved in 90.4% (mean 642.2 days). Group 1 event-free survival was better than group 2 (major adverse cardiovascular events [MACEs], log-rank test P =.03; and death, log-rank test P =.03). In group 1, event-free survival was better on OAC vs non-OAC use (death 5% vs 15%, P =.04; MACE 10% vs 26%, P
U2 - 10.1378/chest.10-1408
DO - 10.1378/chest.10-1408
M3 - Article
C2 - 20864616
VL - 139
SP - 1402
EP - 1409
JO - Chest
JF - Chest
IS - 6
ER -