Risk prediction models for cardiac rupture after acute myocardial infarction: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Le résumé fourni par la source

Background: Cardiac rupture (CR) is a catastrophic complication of acute myocardial infarction (AMI), accounting for 10%-20% of AMI-related deaths despite its low incidence. Several risk prediction models have been developed, but their methodological quality and clinical applicability remain uncertain. This study systematically reviewed and quantitatively synthesized existing prediction models for CR post-AMI. Methods: We searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, CNKI, and Wanfang databases from inception to August 2025. Studies developing or validating risk prediction models for CR after AMI were eligible. Data extraction followed the CHARMS checklist, and methodological quality was assessed with PROBAST. A meta-analysis was performed to pool model discrimination (C-statistic) and evaluate predictors of CR. Subgroup analyses explored heterogeneity by publication period, study design, population, sample size, and validation approach. Results: = 88%). Consistently robust predictors included advanced age (OR = 2.26), female sex (OR = 2.43), higher Killip grade (OR = 3.58), elevated heart rate (OR = 2.29), lower LVEF (OR = 1.46), and absence of emergency PCI (OR = 0.37, protective). Most studies exhibited methodological flaws, including small events-per-variable ratios, univariate-based predictor selection, inadequate handling of missing data, and limited external validation. Conclusion: Existing models demonstrate promising discriminatory ability for predicting CR after AMI but are undermined by substantial methodological limitations. Age, sex, Killip grade, LVEF, and PCI status represent robust predictors that should inform future consensus-based models. Large-scale, prospective, and externally validated studies are urgently needed to develop reliable tools for clinical risk stratification and targeted prevention of this lethal complication. Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD420251105703, PROSPERO CRD420251105703.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.