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 数学 疾病
作者
Patrick G. Sullivan,Joshua D. Wallach,John P. A. Ioannidis
出处
期刊:American Journal of Cardiology [Elsevier BV]
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
刚刚
陈奕彤发布了新的文献求助10
刚刚
小毛发布了新的文献求助30
1秒前
1秒前
ajinjin完成签到,获得积分10
1秒前
小屁孩发布了新的文献求助10
1秒前
3秒前
云轩完成签到,获得积分10
5秒前
drlq2022完成签到,获得积分10
5秒前
小二郎应助柯卿彦采纳,获得10
5秒前
5秒前
浮游应助LIO采纳,获得10
5秒前
chen发布了新的文献求助10
5秒前
姚学宇完成签到,获得积分20
6秒前
6秒前
不吃蔬菜发布了新的文献求助10
6秒前
许衍举发布了新的文献求助10
6秒前
量子星尘发布了新的文献求助10
6秒前
思zj完成签到 ,获得积分10
6秒前
完美花生完成签到,获得积分10
7秒前
7秒前
碎尘发布了新的文献求助10
7秒前
wanci应助cj采纳,获得30
8秒前
yitiaoyezi完成签到,获得积分10
10秒前
LONG发布了新的文献求助10
10秒前
小玉发布了新的文献求助20
10秒前
姚学宇发布了新的文献求助10
10秒前
香蕉觅云应助Billy采纳,获得10
10秒前
Lucas应助生动路人采纳,获得10
10秒前
pbj发布了新的文献求助10
11秒前
CodeCraft应助林钟望采纳,获得10
12秒前
吃西瓜皮发布了新的文献求助30
12秒前
思zj关注了科研通微信公众号
12秒前
13秒前
可爱的函函应助66采纳,获得10
13秒前
14秒前
小蘑菇应助忧心的天真采纳,获得30
14秒前
14秒前
哈哈哈发布了新的文献求助10
15秒前
大个应助pbj采纳,获得10
15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
SOFT MATTER SERIES Volume 22 Soft Matter in Foods 1000
Zur lokalen Geoidbestimmung aus terrestrischen Messungen vertikaler Schweregradienten 1000
Schifanoia : notizie dell'istituto di studi rinascimentali di Ferrara : 66/67, 1/2, 2024 1000
Circulating tumor DNA from blood and cerebrospinal fluid in DLBCL: simultaneous evaluation of mutations, IG rearrangement, and IG clonality 500
Food Microbiology - An Introduction (5th Edition) 500
Architectural Corrosion and Critical Infrastructure 400
热门求助领域 (近24小时)
化学 医学 生物 材料科学 工程类 有机化学 内科学 生物化学 物理 计算机科学 纳米技术 遗传学 基因 复合材料 化学工程 物理化学 病理 催化作用 免疫学 量子力学
热门帖子
关注 科研通微信公众号,转发送积分 4868146
求助须知:如何正确求助?哪些是违规求助? 4159789
关于积分的说明 12899265
捐赠科研通 3914053
什么是DOI,文献DOI怎么找? 2149600
邀请新用户注册赠送积分活动 1168125
关于科研通互助平台的介绍 1070512