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
1秒前
1秒前
噜噜噜发布了新的文献求助10
1秒前
serendipity完成签到,获得积分10
2秒前
俏美眉发布了新的文献求助10
2秒前
LV发布了新的文献求助10
2秒前
爱喝冰美式完成签到 ,获得积分10
3秒前
挖掘机完成签到,获得积分10
4秒前
4秒前
4秒前
Channing_Ho发布了新的文献求助10
4秒前
脑洞疼应助专注的皮卡丘采纳,获得10
5秒前
6秒前
7秒前
jx314完成签到,获得积分10
7秒前
跳跃的猫咪完成签到,获得积分10
7秒前
8秒前
WHH完成签到,获得积分10
8秒前
monrial发布了新的文献求助10
8秒前
GarrickO应助舒心数据线采纳,获得20
8秒前
davidvon发布了新的文献求助20
8秒前
8秒前
wqwq69发布了新的文献求助10
9秒前
调皮雨莲发布了新的文献求助10
9秒前
9秒前
niania发布了新的文献求助10
9秒前
假装有昵称完成签到 ,获得积分10
9秒前
10秒前
程辞完成签到 ,获得积分10
10秒前
愤怒的乐巧关注了科研通微信公众号
10秒前
Ava应助辛勤芷天采纳,获得10
10秒前
11秒前
可靠的秋尽完成签到,获得积分10
11秒前
11秒前
12秒前
卢浩发布了新的文献求助10
12秒前
12秒前
高高很厉害完成签到,获得积分10
12秒前
Candices完成签到,获得积分20
12秒前
12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
HIGH DYNAMIC RANGE CMOS IMAGE SENSORS FOR LOW LIGHT APPLICATIONS 1500
Constitutional and Administrative Law 1000
The Social Work Ethics Casebook: Cases and Commentary (revised 2nd ed.). Frederic G. Reamer 800
Holistic Discourse Analysis 600
Vertébrés continentaux du Crétacé supérieur de Provence (Sud-Est de la France) 600
Vertebrate Palaeontology, 5th Edition 530
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 5352249
求助须知:如何正确求助?哪些是违规求助? 4485120
关于积分的说明 13962087
捐赠科研通 4385062
什么是DOI,文献DOI怎么找? 2409251
邀请新用户注册赠送积分活动 1401706
关于科研通互助平台的介绍 1375258