Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 16, 2025

An R-Based Landscape Validation of a Competing Risk Model
Published on: September 16, 2022
Performance of Prognostic Scoring Systems in MINOCA: A Comparison among GRACE, TIMI, HEART, and ACEF Scores
Damiano Fedele1,2, Lisa Canton1,2, Francesca Bodega1,2
1Cardiology Unit, Cardiac Thoracic and Vascular Department, IRCCS Azienda Ospedaliera-Universitaria di Bologna, 40138 Bologna, Italy.
Insights
Prognostic scores like GRACE showed sub-optimal performance for myocardial infarction with non-obstructive coronary arteries (MINOCA) patients. While GRACE best predicted all-cause death, new MINOCA-specific tools are needed.
Area of Science:
- Cardiology
- Clinical Medicine
- Health Outcomes
Background:
- Myocardial infarction with non-obstructive coronary arteries (MINOCA) carries a significant prognosis.
- Existing prognostic scoring systems require validation for MINOCA patient populations.
Purpose of the Study:
- To evaluate and compare the prognostic performance of GRACE, TIMI, HEART, and ACEF scores in MINOCA patients.
- To assess the predictive accuracy of these scores for major adverse cardiovascular events and all-cause death at one year.
Main Methods:
- Retrospective analysis of 250 MINOCA patients (January 2017 - September 2021).
- Calculation of GRACE, TIMI, HEART, and ACEF scores at admission.
- Primary outcome: composite of all-cause death and acute myocardial infarction (AMI) at 1-year follow-up.
Main Results:
- Tested scores showed sub-optimal performance (AUC 0.7-0.8) for predicting the composite major adverse event in MINOCA.
- GRACE score demonstrated the best prediction for all-cause death, with high specificity.
- GRACE (AUC=0.932) and ACEF (AUC=0.828) scores showed high accuracy for predicting 1-year all-cause death.
Conclusions:
- Current prognostic tools validated in obstructive AMI cohorts may offer utility in MINOCA but are sub-optimal.
- There is a critical need for the development of risk assessment tools specifically tailored for MINOCA patients.
Abstract:
Background: the prognosis of patients with myocardial infarction with non-obstructive coronary arteries (MINOCA) is not benign; thus, prompting the need to validate prognostic scoring systems for this population. Aim: to evaluate and compare the prognostic performance of GRACE, TIMI, HEART, and ACEF scores in MINOCA patients. Methods: A total of 250 MINOCA patients from January 2017 to September 2021 were included. For each patient, the four scores at admission were retrospectively calculated. The primary outcome was a composite of all-cause death and acute myocardial infarction (AMI) at 1-year follow-up. The ability to predict 1-year all-cause death was also tested. Results: Overall, the tested scores presented a sub-optimal performance in predicting the composite major adverse event in MINOCA patients, showing an AUC ranging between 0.7 and 0.8. Among them, the GRACE score appeared to be the best in predicting all-cause death, reaching high specificity with low sensitivity. The best cut-off identified for the GRACE score was 171, higher compared to the cut-off of 140 generally applied to identify high-risk patients with obstructive AMI. When the scores were tested for prediction of 1-year all-cause death, the GRACE and the ACEF score showed very good accuracy (AUC = 0.932 and 0.828, respectively). Conclusion: the prognostic scoring tools, validated in AMI cohorts, could be useful even in MINOCA patients, although their performance appeared sub-optimal, prompting the need for risk assessment tools specific to MINOCA patients.
Related Concept Videos
Acute Coronary Syndrome III: Diagnostic Studies
Imaging Studies for Cardiovascular System VI: Calcium -Scoring CT
Heart Failure IV: Classification and Diagnostic Evaluation
Comparing the Survival Analysis of Two or More Groups
Sensitivity, Specificity, and Predicted Value
Sensitivity is the...
Angina II: Classification

