Comparison of clinical and angiographic prognostic risk scores in elderly patients presenting with acute coronary syndrome and referred for percutaneous coronary intervention.

BACKGROUND: Multiple risk prediction models have been validated in all-age patients presenting with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and treated with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI); however, they have not been validated specifically in the elderly. METHODS: We calculated the GRACE (Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events) score, the logistic EuroSCORE, the AMIS (Acute Myocardial Infarction Swiss registry) score, and the SYNTAX (Synergy between Percutaneous Coronary Intervention with TAXUS and Cardiac Surgery) score in a consecutive series of 114 patients ≥75 years presenting with ACS and treated with PCI within 24 hours of hospital admission. Patients were stratified according to score tertiles and analysed retrospectively by comparing the lower/mid tertiles as an aggregate group with the higher tertile group. The primary endpoint was 30-day mortality. Secondary endpoints were the composite of death and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) at 30 days, and 1-year MACE-free survival. Model discrimination ability was assessed using the area under receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). RESULTS: Thirty-day mortality was higher in the upper tertile compared with the aggregate lower/mid tertiles according to the logistic EuroSCORE (42% vs 5%; odds ratio [OR] = 14, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 4-48; p <0.001; AUC = 0.79), the GRACE score (40% vs 4%; OR = 17, 95% CI = 4-64; p <0.001; AUC = 0.80), the AMIS score (40% vs 4%; OR = 16, 95% CI = 4-63; p <0.001; AUC = 0.80), and the SYNTAX score (37% vs 5%; OR = 11, 95% CI = 3-37; p <0.001; AUC = 0.77). CONCLUSIONS: In elderly patients presenting with ACS and referred to PCI within 24 hours of admission, the GRACE score, the EuroSCORE, the AMIS score, and the SYNTAX score predicted 30 day mortality. The predictive value of clinical scores was improved by using them in combination.

Coffee and tea intake and risk of head and neck cancer: pooled analysis in the International Head and Neck Cancer Epidemiology Consortium.

BACKGROUND: Only a few studies have explored the relation between coffee and tea intake and head and neck cancers, with inconsistent results. METHODS: We pooled individual-level data from nine case-control studies of head and neck cancers, including 5,139 cases and 9,028 controls. Logistic regression was used to estimate odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI), adjusting for potential confounders. RESULTS: Caffeinated coffee intake was inversely related with the risk of cancer of the oral cavity and pharynx: the ORs were 0.96 (95% CI, 0.94-0.98) for an increment of 1 cup per day and 0.61 (95% CI, 0.47-0.80) in drinkers of >4 cups per day versus nondrinkers. This latter estimate was consistent for different anatomic sites (OR, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.30-0.71 for oral cavity; OR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.41-0.82 for oropharynx/hypopharynx; and OR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.37-1.01 for oral cavity/pharynx not otherwise specified) and across strata of selected covariates. No association of caffeinated coffee drinking was found with laryngeal cancer (OR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.64-1.45 in drinkers of >4 cups per day versus nondrinkers). Data on decaffeinated coffee were too sparse for detailed analysis, but indicated no increased risk. Tea intake was not associated with head and neck cancer risk (OR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.89-1.11 for drinkers versus nondrinkers). CONCLUSIONS: This pooled analysis of case-control studies supports the hypothesis of an inverse association between caffeinated coffee drinking and risk of cancer of the oral cavity and pharynx. IMPACT: Given widespread use of coffee and the relatively high incidence and low survival of head and neck cancers, the observed inverse association may have appreciable public health relevance.

Preoperative nutritional screening by the specialist instead of the nutritional risk score might prevent excess nutrition: a multivariate analysis of nutritional risk factors.

BACKGROUND: The aim of the current study was to assess whether widely used nutritional parameters are correlated with the nutritional risk score (NRS-2002) to identify postoperative morbidity and to evaluate the role of nutritionists in nutritional assessment. METHODS: A randomized trial on preoperative nutritional interventions (NCT00512213) provided the study cohort of 152 patients at nutritional risk (NRS-2002 ≥3) with a comprehensive phenotyping including diverse nutritional parameters (n=17), elaborated by nutritional specialists, and potential demographic and surgical (n=5) confounders. Risk factors for overall, severe (Dindo-Clavien 3-5) and infectious complications were identified by univariate analysis; parameters with P<0.20 were then entered in a multiple logistic regression model. RESULTS: Final analysis included 140 patients with complete datasets. Of these, 61 patients (43.6%) were overweight, and 72 patients (51.4%) experienced at least one complication of any degree of severity. Univariate analysis identified a correlation between few (≤3) active co-morbidities (OR=4.94; 95% CI: 1.47-16.56, p=0.01) and overall complications. Patients screened as being malnourished by nutritional specialists presented less overall complications compared to the not malnourished (OR=0.47; 95% CI: 0.22-0.97, p=0.043). Severe postoperative complications occurred more often in patients with low lean body mass (OR=1.06; 95% CI: 1-1.12, p=0.028). Few (≤3) active co-morbidities (OR=8.8; 95% CI: 1.12-68.99, p=0.008) were related with postoperative infections. Patients screened as being malnourished by nutritional specialists presented less infectious complications (OR=0.28; 95% CI: 0.1-0.78), p=0.014) as compared to the not malnourished. Multivariate analysis identified few co-morbidities (OR=6.33; 95% CI: 1.75-22.84, p=0.005), low weight loss (OR=1.08; 95% CI: 1.02-1.14, p=0.006) and low hemoglobin concentration (OR=2.84; 95% CI: 1.22-6.59, p=0.021) as independent risk factors for overall postoperative complications. Compliance with nutritional supplements (OR=0.37; 95% CI: 0.14-0.97, p=0.041) and supplementation of malnourished patients as assessed by nutritional specialists (OR=0.24; 95% CI: 0.08-0.69, p=0.009) were independently associated with decreased infectious complications. CONCLUSIONS: Nutritional support based upon NRS-2002 screening might result in overnutrition, with potentially deleterious clinical consequences. We emphasize the importance of detailed assessment of the nutritional status by a dedicated specialist before deciding on early nutritional intervention for patients with an initial NRS-2002 score of ≥3.