scholarly journals Impact of Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index on cardiovascular outcomes in patients with stable coronary artery disease

2017 ◽  
Vol 69 (1) ◽  
pp. 383-388 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ayako Kunimura ◽  
Hideki Ishii ◽  
Tadayuki Uetani ◽  
Toshijirou Aoki ◽  
Kazuhiro Harada ◽  
...  
2021 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yu Fan ◽  
Lian He ◽  
Yongjing Zhou ◽  
Changfeng Man

Background: Low Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index has been identified as an index of impaired nutritional state. The objective of the meta-analysis was to assess the association of the Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index (GNRI) with adverse outcomes in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD).Methods: Relevant studies were identified by comprehensively searching PubMed and Embase databases in May 2021. Studies assessing the association of GNRI with all-cause mortality or major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) in patients with CAD were included. The predictive value of GNRI was summarized by pooling multivariable adjusted risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) per GNRI point decrease or the lowest vs. the highest GNRI group.Results: A total of eight studies involving 9277 patients with CAD were analyzed. Meta-analysis showed that the lowest GNRI was associated with a higher risk of all-cause mortality (RR 2.10; 95% CI 1.68–2.63) and MACEs (RR 2.84; 95% CI 1.56–5.16), respectively. Furthermore, per point decrease in GNRI was associated with 8 and 10% additional risk of all-cause mortality and MACEs. Subgroup analysis indicated that the value of low GNRI in predicting all-cause mortality was not affected by subtype of patients or follow-up duration.Conclusion: Low GNRI score at baseline was associated with a higher risk of all-cause mortality and cardiovascular events in patients with CAD. The nutritional state estimated by the GNRI score could provide important predictive information in patients with CAD.


Author(s):  
Leonardo De Luca ◽  
Dario Formigli ◽  
Jennifer Meessen ◽  
Massimo Uguccioni ◽  
Nicola Cosentino ◽  
...  

Abstract Aims Recently, the cardiovascular outcomes for people using anticoagulation strategies (COMPASS) trial demonstrated that dual therapy reduced cardiovascular outcomes compared with aspirin alone in patients with stable atherosclerotic disease. Methods and results We sought to assess the proportion of patients eligible for the COMPASS trial and to compare the epidemiology and outcome of these patients with those without COMPASS inclusion or with any exclusion criteria in a contemporary, nationwide cohort of patients with stable coronary artery disease. Among the 4068 patients with detailed information allowing evaluation of eligibility, 1416 (34.8%) did not fulfil the inclusion criteria (COMPASS-Not-Included), 841 (20.7%) had exclusion criteria (COMPASS-Excluded), and the remaining 1811 (44.5%) were classified as COMPASS-Like. At 1 year, the incidence of major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE), a composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, and stroke, was 0.9% in the COMPASS-Not-Included and 2.0% in the COMPASS-Like (P = 0.01), and 5.0% in the COMPASS-Excluded group (P < 0.0001 for all comparisons). Among the COMPASS-Like population, patients with multiple COMPASS enrichment criteria presented a significant increase in the risk of MACE (from 1.0% to 3.3% in those with 1 and ≥3 criteria, respectively; P = 0.012), and a modest absolute increase in major bleeding risk (from 0.2% to 0.4%, respectively; P = 0.46). Conclusion In a contemporary real-world cohort registry of stable coronary artery disease, most patients resulted as eligible for the COMPASS. These patients presented a considerable annual risk of MACE that consistently increases in the presence of multiple risk factors.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document