Search

Aims: To explore the ability of the ACEF score to predict the incidence of contrast-induced nephropathy (CIN) in patients undergoing coronary angiography with or without percutaneous coronary intervention., Methods: A total of 706 patients undergoing coronary angiography ± percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) between March 2011 and October 2011 were analyzed. CIN using different definitions was termed as CINnarrow (rise in serum creatinine ≥0.5 mg/dl) and CINbroad (rise in serum creatinine ≥0.5 mg/dl and/or ≥25% increase in baseline serum creatinine)., Results: The mean ACEF score was 1.5 ± 0.6. Overall incidences of CINnarrow and CINbroad were 5.5% and 13.6%, respectively. There was a significant gradient in the incidence of CINnarrow (2.9%, 3.9%, 10.6% in the I, II, and III tertiles, respectively, P < 0.001) and CINbroad (9.1%, 14.2%, 17.9% in the I, II, and III tertiles, respectively, P = 0.021) across increasing ACEF tertiles. The ACEF score was independently associated with the risk of CINnarrow (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 1.6, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.0-2.7; P = 0.047). Discrimination was more satisfactory when using the ACEF as a predictor of CINnarrow (c-statistic 0.71, 95% 0.63-0.79)., Conclusion: The ACEF score is an independent and potentially useful predictor of CIN defined as rise in serum creatinine ≥0.5 mg/dl.

Background: The aim of the present study was to appraise the comparative ability of different ACEF models incorporating glomerular filtration rate or creatinine clearance estimated by the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease [ACEFMDRD] or Cokcroft-Gault [ACEFCG] equations, respectively, over the original ACEF score (ACEFSrCr) in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI)., Methods: A total of 537 patients were analyzed by different measures of discrimination, calibration and net reclassification improvement (NRI)., Results: A significant gradient in all-cause mortality was consistently seen with all the models at 30 days, 1 year and 5 years. The comparison of the three models showed that the best balance in terms of discrimination and calibration for all-cause mortality was offered by the ACEFCG at 30 days, the ACEFMDRD at 1 year and similarly by the ACEFCG and ACEFMDRD at 5 years. At 30 days, the NRI was +32.9% for ACEFMDRD over ACEFSrCr and +16% for ACEFCG over ACEFSrCr. At 1 year, the NRI was 13.8% for ACEFMDRD over ACEFSrCr and -7.8% for ACEFCG over ACEFSrCr. At 5 years, the NRI was +7.7% for both the ACEFMDRD and the ACEFCG over the ACEFSrCr., Conclusions: In patients undergoing PCI, the ACEF score is associated with satisfactory early-, mid- and long-term discrimination regardless of the definition of renal function. However, incorporating glomerular filtration rate or creatinine clearance by the MDRD or CG formulas in the ACEF score yields superior calibration compared with the original SrCr-based equation, with the ACEFMDRD displaying superior reclassification ability over the ACEFCG and ACEFSrCr at 30 days and 1 year., (Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)