Meta-Analysis Comparing Established Risk Prediction Models (EuroSCORE II, STS Score, and ACEF Score) for Perioperative Mortality During Cardiac Surgery

医学 欧洲分数 弗雷明翰风险评分 围手术期 内科学 荟萃分析 混淆 心脏外科 心脏病学 射血分数 预测建模 外科 心力衰竭 统计 疾病 数学
作者
Patrick G. Sullivan,Joshua D. Wallach,John P. A. Ioannidis
出处
期刊:American Journal of Cardiology [Elsevier]
卷期号:118 (10): 1574-1582 被引量:110
标识
DOI:10.1016/j.amjcard.2016.08.024
摘要

A wide variety of multivariable risk models have been developed to predict mortality in the setting of cardiac surgery; however, the relative utility of these models is unknown. This study investigated the literature related to comparisons made between established risk prediction models for perioperative mortality used in the setting of cardiac surgery. A systematic review was conducted to capture studies in cardiac surgery comparing the relative performance of at least 2 prediction models cited in recent guidelines (European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation [EuroSCORE II], Society for Thoracic Surgeons 2008 Cardiac Surgery Risk Models [STS] score, and Age, Creatinine, Ejection Fraction [ACEF] score) for the outcomes of 1-month or inhospital mortality. For articles that met inclusion criteria, we extracted information on study design, predictive performance of risk models, and potential for bias. Meta-analyses were conducted to calculate a summary estimate of the difference in AUCs between models. We identified 22 eligible studies that contained 33 comparisons among the above models. Meta-analysis of differences in AUCs revealed that the EuroSCORE II and STS score performed similarly (with a summary difference in AUC = 0.00), while outperforming the ACEF score (with summary differences in AUC of 0.10 and 0.08, respectively, p <0.05). Other metrics of discrimination and calibration were presented less consistently, and no study presented any metric of reclassification. Small sample size and absent descriptions of missing data were common in these studies. In conclusion, the EuroSCORE II and STS score outperform the ACEF score on discrimination. A wide variety of multivariable risk models have been developed to predict mortality in the setting of cardiac surgery; however, the relative utility of these models is unknown. This study investigated the literature related to comparisons made between established risk prediction models for perioperative mortality used in the setting of cardiac surgery. A systematic review was conducted to capture studies in cardiac surgery comparing the relative performance of at least 2 prediction models cited in recent guidelines (European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation [EuroSCORE II], Society for Thoracic Surgeons 2008 Cardiac Surgery Risk Models [STS] score, and Age, Creatinine, Ejection Fraction [ACEF] score) for the outcomes of 1-month or inhospital mortality. For articles that met inclusion criteria, we extracted information on study design, predictive performance of risk models, and potential for bias. Meta-analyses were conducted to calculate a summary estimate of the difference in AUCs between models. We identified 22 eligible studies that contained 33 comparisons among the above models. Meta-analysis of differences in AUCs revealed that the EuroSCORE II and STS score performed similarly (with a summary difference in AUC = 0.00), while outperforming the ACEF score (with summary differences in AUC of 0.10 and 0.08, respectively, p <0.05). Other metrics of discrimination and calibration were presented less consistently, and no study presented any metric of reclassification. Small sample size and absent descriptions of missing data were common in these studies. In conclusion, the EuroSCORE II and STS score outperform the ACEF score on discrimination.
最长约 10秒,即可获得该文献文件

科研通智能强力驱动
Strongly Powered by AbleSci AI
更新
PDF的下载单位、IP信息已删除 (2025-6-4)

科研通是完全免费的文献互助平台,具备全网最快的应助速度,最高的求助完成率。 对每一个文献求助,科研通都将尽心尽力,给求助人一个满意的交代。
实时播报
充电宝应助theflalash采纳,获得10
刚刚
1秒前
mengdewen完成签到,获得积分10
5秒前
9秒前
自由蓉发布了新的文献求助10
9秒前
慕青应助ddd采纳,获得30
9秒前
在水一方应助魔幻的冬寒采纳,获得10
10秒前
11秒前
积极的煎蛋完成签到,获得积分10
11秒前
CipherSage应助取名真烦采纳,获得10
12秒前
12秒前
eee完成签到,获得积分20
13秒前
vagrant发布了新的文献求助10
17秒前
19秒前
20秒前
火星上的绿蕊完成签到,获得积分10
21秒前
度华容完成签到 ,获得积分10
21秒前
畅快的寻凝完成签到,获得积分10
21秒前
22秒前
sunrise完成签到,获得积分10
24秒前
24秒前
研友_VZG7GZ应助小D采纳,获得10
25秒前
25秒前
Mic应助maimai采纳,获得10
25秒前
雪山飞虹完成签到,获得积分10
26秒前
26秒前
小胡同学发布了新的文献求助10
27秒前
梅子酒完成签到,获得积分10
27秒前
27秒前
Aki_27完成签到,获得积分10
28秒前
量子星尘发布了新的文献求助10
28秒前
HH完成签到 ,获得积分10
29秒前
自然若完成签到,获得积分10
30秒前
俭朴念双完成签到,获得积分10
30秒前
斯文败类应助rsy采纳,获得10
30秒前
飞快的薯片完成签到,获得积分10
30秒前
31秒前
32秒前
一桶给一桶的求助进行了留言
32秒前
小包Gn发布了新的文献求助10
32秒前
高分求助中
(应助此贴封号)【重要!!请各用户(尤其是新用户)详细阅读】【科研通的精品贴汇总】 10000
The Social Work Ethics Casebook: Cases and Commentary (revised 2nd ed.).. Frederic G. Reamer 1070
Alloy Phase Diagrams 1000
Introduction to Early Childhood Education 1000
2025-2031年中国兽用抗生素行业发展深度调研与未来趋势报告 1000
List of 1,091 Public Pension Profiles by Region 891
Historical Dictionary of British Intelligence (2014 / 2nd EDITION!) 500
热门求助领域 (近24小时)
化学 材料科学 医学 生物 工程类 有机化学 生物化学 物理 纳米技术 计算机科学 内科学 化学工程 复合材料 物理化学 基因 遗传学 催化作用 冶金 量子力学 光电子学
热门帖子
关注 科研通微信公众号,转发送积分 5424308
求助须知:如何正确求助?哪些是违规求助? 4538684
关于积分的说明 14163217
捐赠科研通 4455559
什么是DOI,文献DOI怎么找? 2443800
邀请新用户注册赠送积分活动 1434944
关于科研通互助平台的介绍 1412304