Key result
EuroSCORE II and EuroSCORE (additive and logistic) showed good calibration but fair discrimination in predicting mortality for Nepalese cardiac surgical patients, with AUCs of 0.616, 0.632, and 0.636 respectively.
Why the study?
Limitations in the original EuroSCORE prompted the development of EuroSCORE II, motivating a comparison between the two models in Nepalese cardiac surgical patients.
Does EuroSCORE II predict mortality better than EuroSCORE (additive and logistic) in adult cardiac surgical patients in Nepal?
Cohort (n=972)
No
Does EuroSCORE II predict mortality better than EuroSCORE (additive and logistic) in adult cardiac surgical patients in Nepal?
In a Nepalese cardiac surgical cohort, EuroSCORE II underpredicted mortality compared to the older EuroSCORE models, though all models demonstrated good calibration and fair discrimination.
EuroSCORE II underpredicted mortality in this Nepalese cohort; leaves open need for local recalibration of surgical risk models.
Introduction: European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation (EuroSCORE) is the standard tool for risk stratification of patients undergoing cardiac surgery. Its relevance has been validated in European, Asian countries and also in Nepal. Its limitations led to development of EuroSCORE II. This study was carried out to compare EuroSCORE II with EuroSCORE in Nepalese cardiac surgical patients. Methods: A retrospective analytical cohort study of 3 years duration in 972 adult cardiac surgeries was conducted. Scores obtained from EuroSCORE (Logistic and Additive) and EuroSCORE II was compared with the observed mortality. Calibration was calculated by Hosmer- Lemeshow (H-L) test (Chi Square test) and discrimination by calculating the area under the curve (AUC) of receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curve. Results: Observed mortality was 4.11%. EuroSCORE additive, logistic and EuroSCORE II predicted mortality were 4.32%, 4.55% and 2.13% respectively. H-L chi square calculation for EuroSCORE additive model could not hold as all observed and expected frequencies match exactly. Hence it can be considered as a good fit. EuroSCORE logistic model (H-L, Chi-square 7.743, p<0.001) and EuroSCORE II (H-L, Chi-square 11.631, p = 0.168) also showed good fit i.e. both can predict mortality satisfactorily. AUC of ROC curve of EuroSCORE additive, logistic and EuroSCORE II were 0.632, 0.636 and 0.616 respectively, which showed fair discrimination power. Conclusion: Mortality prediction of adult cardiac surgical patients by EuroSCORE (additive and logistic) and EuroSCORE II was satisfactory.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Pradhan et al. (2020) conducted a cohort in Adult cardiac surgeries (n=972). EuroSCORE II vs. EuroSCORE (Additive and Logistic) was evaluated on Area under the ROC curve (AUC) for mortality prediction. EuroSCORE II and EuroSCORE (additive and logistic) showed good calibration but fair discrimination in predicting mortality for Nepalese cardiac surgical patients, with AUCs of 0.616, 0.632, and 0.636 respectively.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: