In patients with UA/NSTEMI

TIMI Risk Score: A simple, effective tool for initial risk assessment

Risk Assement ToolPatients with ACS who are diagnosed as having UA/NSTEMI, present with varying degrees of ischemic risk. A multivariate analysis that adjusts for several prognostic variables simultaneously provides a more accurate tool for risk stratification. In addition, the prognostic scoring system must be readily applicable using standard patient features that are part of the routine, initial medical evaluation. The TIMI risk score, developed to address this need, has been shown to predict the risk of ischemic events.

“The TIMI risk score…enables a clinician to categorize a patient’s risk of death and ischemic events at the critical initial evaluation.”1

TIMI Risk Score Predictor Variables
TIMI risk score predictor variables
Click Image for Larger View (PDF format)

Because of the complex profiles of these patients, clinicians individually assess prognosis to formulate plans for treatment. The TIMI risk score may be used as a basis for therapeutic decision-making. Prognostication of patient risk allows clinicians to triage patients to the optimum location for medical care, such as the ICU vs hospital ward vs outpatient care. The TIMI risk score also helps identify patients for whom antithrombotic therapies would be especially effective, even those in whom the treatment benefit may be smaller. As demonstrated in the charts below, the TIMI risk score demonstrates that the higher the score, the greater the risk of death or ischemic events. Therefore, patients with higher risk scores may be candidates for early, aggressive treatment.

Rate of Death or MI by 14 Days
TIMI risk score predictor variables
Click Image for Larger View (PDF format)
Rate of Death, MI, or Urgent Revascularization by 14 Days
TIMI risk score predictor variables
Click Image for Larger View (PDF format)

 

Reference: 1. Antman EM, Cohen M, Bernink PJ, et al. The TIMI risk score for unstable angina/non-ST elevation MI: a method for prognostication and therapeutic decision making. JAMA. 2000;284:835–842.

Share