PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
February 12, 2013Interactive Cardiovascular and Thoracic Surgery84 citations

Comparison of original EuroSCORE, EuroSCORE II and STS risk models in a Turkish cardiac surgical cohort†

AKAyşe Gül KuntIzmir UniversityMKMurat KurtcepheBilkent UniversityMHMete HıdıroğluAnkara University

Key Points

  • To compare the predictive accuracy and calibration of additive EuroSCORE, logistic EuroSCORE, EuroSCORE II, and STS risk models in estimating mortality for coronary artery bypass graft surgery.
  • Analyzed N=428 patients undergoing isolated coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) between 2004 and 2012 from the TurkoSCORE database.

Structured PICO

Does EuroSCORE II accurately predict hospital mortality compared to original EuroSCORE and STS risk models in a Turkish CABG cohort?

P
Population
428 patients who underwent isolated coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) between 2004 and 2012, extracted from the TurkoSCORE database, mean age 74.5, 35.0% female.
I
Intervention
EuroSCORE II risk model
C
Comparator
Additive EuroSCORE, logistic EuroSCORE, and STS risk models
O
Outcome
Hospital mortality (observed vs predicted)hard clinical

EuroSCORE II significantly underestimates hospital mortality risk in Turkish patients undergoing isolated CABG, whereas the original EuroSCORE and STS models are better calibrated.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare additive and logistic European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation (EuroSCORE), EuroSCORE II and the Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) models in calculating mortality risk in a Turkish cardiac surgical population. METHODS: The current patient population consisted of 428 patients who underwent isolated coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) between 2004 and 2012, extracted from the TurkoSCORE database. Observed and predicted mortalities were compared for the additive/logistic EuroSCORE, EuroSCORE II and STS risk calculator. The area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUC) values were calculated for these models to compare predictive power. RESULTS: The mean patient age was 74.5 ± 3.9 years at the time of surgery, and 35.0% were female. For the entire cohort, actual hospital mortality was 7.9% (n = 34; 95% confidence interval CI 5.4-10.5). However, the additive EuroSCORE-predicted mortality was 6.4% (P = 0.23 vs observed; 95% CI 6.2-6.6), logistic EuroSCORE-predicted mortality was 7.9% (P = 0.98 vs observed; 95% CI 7.3-8.6), EuroSCORE II- predicted mortality was 1.7% (P = 0.00 vs observed; 95% CI 1.6-1.8) and STS predicted mortality was 5.8% (P = 0.10 vs observed; 95% CI 5.4-6.2). The mean predictive performance of the analysed models for the entire cohort was fair, with 0.7 (95% CI 0.60-0.79). AUC values for additive EuroSCORE, logistic EuroSCORE, EuroSCORE II and STS risk calculator were 0.70 (95% CI 0.60-0.79), 0.70 (95% CI 0.59-0.80), 0.72 (95% CI 0.62-0.81) and 0.62 (95% CI 0.51-0.73), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: EuroSCORE II significantly underestimated mortality risk for Turkish cardiac patients, whereas additive and logistic EuroSCORE and STS risk calculators were well calibrated.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Kunt et al. (2013) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a1ae6b85448f1e38b462c41https://doi.org/10.1093/icvts/ivt022
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper