Tran, Phillip

Background: The timing of coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) in patients with non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) may critically impact clinical outcomes, yet the ideal surgical window remains unclear. We aimed to evaluate the association between time-to-CABG and in-hospital outcomes among NSTEMI admissions undergoing CABG. Methods: This retrospective cohort study utilized the US National Inpatient Sample database from 2017 to 2021 to evaluate the association between time-to-CABG and key in-hospital outcomes, including mortality, cardiac arrest, cardiogenic shock, ischemic stroke, acute kidney injury, and blood transfusion rates, while assessing length of stay (LOS) and hospital charges exclusively among survivors. Adult admissions with principal diagnosis of NSTEMI who underwent CABG without prior interhospital transfer were grouped by the calendar day of CABG from admission (0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and ≥7). Multivariate regression models were used to assess the outcomes across these eight groups. Results: Of 142,200 included admissions, same-day CABG (hospital day 0) was associated with the highest rates of in-hospital mortality, cardiac arrest, cardiogenic shock, and ischemic stroke. The adjusted odds of mortality, cardiac arrest, and cardiogenic shock were lower among admissions undergoing CABG between days 2 and 5. Likewise, the adjusted odds of ischemic stroke were lowest when CABG occurred on days 2 to 4. The odds of AKI increased when CABG was delayed beyond day 6, whereas blood transfusion rates showed no statistically significant association with time-to-CABG. Among survivors, LOS and hospital charges progressively increased with delayed CABGs. Conclusions: Among NSTEMI admissions undergoing CABG, CABG performed on hospital days 2 to 4 was associated with lower adjusted odds of several adverse in-hospital outcomes compared with same-day CABG. Further prospective studies are needed to validate these results and guide clinical decision-making.

aims: We assessed the diagnostic accuracy of the SVEAT score in predicting 30-day major adverse cardiac events (MACE) in comparison with the well-established HEART and TIMI scores. background: Acute chest pain (ACP) is a common symptom in emergency departments. Various risk stratification tools have been developed to assess patients presenting with ACP. The Simple Vascular Event Assessment Tool (SVEAT) is the most recent scoring system introduced, based on five variables: Symptoms of chest pain, history of Vascular disease, ECG, Age, and Troponin-I. objective: We assessed the diagnostic accuracy of the SVEAT score in predicting 30-day major adverse cardiac events (MACE) in comparison with the well-established HEART and TIMI scores. method: Following PRISMA guidelines, a systematic literature search was conducted across five databases until June 22, 2024. Four studies comprising 1,520 patients were included in this meta-analysis. The predictive accuracy of the SVEAT, HEART, and TIMI scores for 30-day MACE was assessed by the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). Heterogeneity was evaluated using the I² statistic, with values over 75% indicating significant heterogeneity. Indirect comparisons among the scores were performed using the Z-test. result: Pooled AUC for the SVEAT score was 0.92 (95% CI: 0.86-0.98), indicating superior predictive accuracy compared to the HEART (AUC: 0.86, 95% CI: 0.81-0.92) and TIMI (AUC: 0.82, 95% CI: 0.69-0.96) scores. However, significant heterogeneity (I² = 90.6%) was observed across studies, potentially due to variations in patient demographics, clinical settings, and outcome definitions. Despite the higher AUC, indirect Z-test comparisons revealed no statistically significant differences between the scoring systems. conclusion: SVEAT score demonstrates potential as an accurate tool for predicting 30-day MACE in patients with ACP. other: N/A