Motivation:

In Colombia, different models of cardiovascular risk assessment are currently being used. The motivation of this study is to analyse the concordance between the ACC/AHA 2013 equation, SCORE and adjusted Framingham, as well as the impact of using one or another in the amount of patients classified as high risk and the amount of patients requiring pharmacological management.

Methods:

800 patients between 40 and 74 years old were assessed, from the primary prevention clinic of the Hospital Militar Central in Bogotá (Colombia), who were free of cardiovascular events. 10-year risk for atherosclerotic vascular disease was estimated according to the equations proposed by ACC/AHA 2013 guides, the risk of cardiovascular death according to the SCORE function of the European guide and the coronary risk according to the adjusted Framingham function recommended by the Colombian guide. The indication of pharmacological management was considered with an ACC/AHA or adjusted Framingham risk of > 7.5%. A >20% Framingham or a >5% SCORE risk were considered high risk.

Results:

According to Framingham there was a 5.9% of high-risk patients, according to SCORE equations for low-risk countries an 18.7% and according to SCORE equations for high-risk countries, a 31.2%. The Kappa coefficient showed a low concordance between adjusted Framingham and each of the SCORE equations (0.28 and 0.22 respectively). According to the ACC/AHA guide recommendations, hypolipidemic treatment would be indicated in 40.8% of patients, versus a 50.6% following the Colombian guide indications (adjusted Framingham). Kappa coefficient was 0.5735.

Conclusions:

Nowadays there is a poor agreement between the different cardiovascular risk assessment scales used in Colombia, thus generating uncertainty when it comes to making therapeutic choices. Data from this study show the need to validate the validate the SCORE and ACC/AHA models in Colombia and Latin America.

        · resumen en Español     · texto en Español     · Español ( pdf )