MARATTO

article · Clinical and Applied Thrombosis/Hemostasis

Accuracy of C2HEST and HARSM2-AF Scores in Predicting Atrial Fibrillation After Acute Coronary Syndrome Treated with Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

2026Open accessMohamed I University

Abstract

IntroductionThe new onset atrial fibrillation (NOAF) is a complication that should not be dismissed after an acute coronary syndrome since this association is characterized by a high ischemic risk.MethodsWe investigated the performance of C2HEST and the HARMS2-AF scores for predicting NOAF during hospitalization in patients admitted with ACS treated with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).ResultsAmong the 763 patients eligible for the inclusion criteria, 64 patients developed NOAF during the index hospitalization, with an incidence of 8.38%. For the C2HEST score, the mean score in the NOAF group was higher than in the other group [NOAF versus No NOAF: 2.45 (± 1.79) versus 1.27 (± 1.43), p < 0.001], and ROC analysis showed good accuracy of C2HEST score in predicting NOAF with cut-off ≥3 [AUC = 0.699; 95%CI [0.665; 0.731], p < 0.001]. For the HARMS2-AF score, the mean score in the NOAF group was higher than in the other group [NOAF versus No NOAF: 9.22 (± 3.5) versus 6.72 (± 2.94), p < 0.001] and ROC analysis showed good accuracy of C2HEST score in predicting NOAF with cut-off≥7 [AUC = 0.722; 95%CI [0.689; 0.754], p < 0.001], and the comparison of the two scores found no significant difference with de long test p value at 0.326. A multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that C2HEST score >3 (OR = 1.86, p = 0.043) and HARMS2-AF >7 (OR = 3.91, p < 0.001) were independently associated with NOAF.ConclusionThe C2HEST and HARMS2-AF are simple scores that can predict NOAF in patients with ACS treated with PCI with good accuracy.

Research topics

  • Atrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes
  • Antiplatelet Therapy and Cardiovascular Diseases
  • Acute Myocardial Infarction Research

Sustainable Development Goals

Read the original research

This page summarises published work. The authoritative version sits with the publisher.

DOI: 10.1177/10760296261422491

Is something wrong with this record? Report it or request removal.

Discussion

Discuss this research

Have you built on this work, tried to replicate it, or seen it applied in practice? Share what you know. Verified researchers and MARATTO™ domain experts can open a discussion, and any member can reply. Contributions are reviewed before they appear.

No discussion yet. Open the first thread.