Evaluation of the InterTAK Diagnostic Score in differentiating Takotsubo syndrome from acute coronary syndrome. A single center experience.
Takotsubo syndrome
acute coronary syndrome
broken heart syndrome
clinical score
Journal
Cardiology journal
ISSN: 1898-018X
Titre abrégé: Cardiol J
Pays: Poland
ID NLM: 101392712
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2021
2021
Historique:
received:
14
03
2019
accepted:
19
08
2019
revised:
01
07
2019
pubmed:
7
9
2019
medline:
18
9
2021
entrez:
7
9
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The aim of this study was to evaluate the usefulness of a novel clinical score - the InterTAK Diagnostic Score in differentiating Takotsubo syndrome (TTS) from acute coronary syndrome (ACS). Medical records of 40 consecutive patients with ACS and 20 patients with TTS were managed and retrospectively analyzed at the documented center. Each patient was evaluated using the Inter- TAK Diagnostic Score. To illustrate the diagnostic ability of the score, a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was performed. Takotsube syndrome patients were more often female compared to the ACS group (70% vs. 27.5%, p = 0.002), an emotional trigger was more prevalent among the TTS group (65% vs. 7.5%, p < 0.001). The area under the curve (AUC) for the score was 0.885 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.78-0.97). Using a cut-off value of 45 points, the sum of sensitivity and specificity was the highest. However, when patients with a score of ≥ 50 were diagnosed as TTS, 85% were diagnosed correctly. When patients with score ≤ 31 were diagnosed as ACS, 92% were diagnosed correctly. The InterTAK Diagnostic Score might help in differentiating TTS from ACSs with high sensitivity and specificity. This finding requires further investigation to confirm its clinical utility.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
The aim of this study was to evaluate the usefulness of a novel clinical score - the InterTAK Diagnostic Score in differentiating Takotsubo syndrome (TTS) from acute coronary syndrome (ACS).
METHODS
Medical records of 40 consecutive patients with ACS and 20 patients with TTS were managed and retrospectively analyzed at the documented center. Each patient was evaluated using the Inter- TAK Diagnostic Score. To illustrate the diagnostic ability of the score, a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was performed.
RESULTS
Takotsube syndrome patients were more often female compared to the ACS group (70% vs. 27.5%, p = 0.002), an emotional trigger was more prevalent among the TTS group (65% vs. 7.5%, p < 0.001). The area under the curve (AUC) for the score was 0.885 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.78-0.97). Using a cut-off value of 45 points, the sum of sensitivity and specificity was the highest. However, when patients with a score of ≥ 50 were diagnosed as TTS, 85% were diagnosed correctly. When patients with score ≤ 31 were diagnosed as ACS, 92% were diagnosed correctly.
CONCLUSIONS
The InterTAK Diagnostic Score might help in differentiating TTS from ACSs with high sensitivity and specificity. This finding requires further investigation to confirm its clinical utility.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31489610
pii: VM/OJS/J/63578
doi: 10.5603/CJ.a2019.0086
pmc: PMC8169192
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
416-422Références
Eur Heart J. 2018 Jun 7;39(22):2047-2062
pubmed: 29850820
Pol Arch Med Wewn. 2010 Jun;120(6):231-6
pubmed: 20567207
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2018 Aug 21;72(8):874-882
pubmed: 30115226
Eur Heart J. 2019 Jul 1;40(26):2142-2151
pubmed: 31098611
J Am Heart Assoc. 2016 Jun 13;5(6):
pubmed: 27412903
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2003 Mar 5;41(5):737-42
pubmed: 12628715
Eur Heart J. 2016 Oct 01;37(37):2823-2829
pubmed: 26935270
JAMA Cardiol. 2016 Jun 1;1(3):335-40
pubmed: 27438117
Am Heart J. 2012 Jul;164(1):66-71.e1
pubmed: 22795284
Am Heart J. 2008 Mar;155(3):408-17
pubmed: 18294473
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2010 Jan 26;55(4):333-41
pubmed: 20117439
Acta Diabetol. 2016 Dec;53(6):1061-1063
pubmed: 27665438
Eur Heart J. 2018 Jun 7;39(22):2032-2046
pubmed: 29850871
Eur Heart J. 2018 Jan 7;39(2):119-177
pubmed: 28886621
Eur J Heart Fail. 2017 Aug;19(8):1036-1042
pubmed: 27928880
Eur Heart J. 2016 Jan 14;37(3):267-315
pubmed: 26320110
Cardiovasc Revasc Med. 2019 Feb;20(2):153-166
pubmed: 30581088
N Engl J Med. 2015 Sep 3;373(10):929-38
pubmed: 26332547
Curr Cardiol Rev. 2013 Aug;9(3):191-6
pubmed: 23642025
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2011 Mar 29;57(13):1496-7
pubmed: 21435521
Cardiovasc Revasc Med. 2019 Jan;20(1):70-79
pubmed: 30528096
Heart. 2017 Sep;103(18):1461-1469
pubmed: 28839096
Circulation. 2019 Jan 15;139(3):413-415
pubmed: 30586690
Int J Cardiol. 2013 Jul 1;166(3):584-8
pubmed: 22192296
Kardiol Pol. 2012;70(3):233-40
pubmed: 22430401