Key result
Prediction models and risk scores in adult congenital heart disease are limited by small sample sizes and lack of validation, highlighting the need for multicenter collaboration.
Why the study?
Most congenital heart disease patients survive to adulthood with complications, but relatively few prediction models exist for adults with congenital heart disease, often lacking validation.
Adequately validated risk scores are needed in adult congenital heart disease to guide follow-up, treatment escalation, and timely referral, requiring multicenter collaboration and potentially artificial intelligence.
Reliance on unvalidated scores warrants caution in ACHD; leaves open the need for multicenter collaboration and AI to develop robust tools.
Nowadays, most patients with congenital heart disease survive to adulthood due to advances in pediatric cardiac surgery but often present with various comorbidities and long-term complications, posing challenges in their management. The development and clinical use of risk scores for the prediction of morbidity and/or mortality in adults with congenital heart disease (ACHD) is fundamental in achieving optimal management for these patients, including appropriate follow-up frequency, treatment escalation, and timely referral for invasive procedures or heart transplantation. In comparison with other fields of cardiovascular medicine, there are relatively few studies that report prediction models developed in the ACHD population, given the small sample size, heterogeneity of the population, and relatively low event rate. Some studies report risk scores originally developed in pediatric congenital or non-congenital population, externally validated in ACHD with variable success. Available risk scores are designed to predict heart failure or arrhythmic events, all-cause mortality, post-intervention outcomes, infective endocarditis, or atherosclerosis-related cardiovascular disease in ACHD. A substantial number of these scores are derived from retrospective studies and are not internally or externally validated. Adequately validated risk scores can be invaluable in clinical practice and an important step towards personalized medicine. Multicenter collaboration, adequate study design, and the potential use of artificial intelligence are important elements in the effort to develop reliable risk scores for the ACHD population.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Arvanitaki et al. (2021) conducted a review in Adult Congenital Heart Disease (ACHD). Prediction models and risk scores was evaluated. Prediction models and risk scores in adult congenital heart disease are limited by small sample sizes and lack of validation, highlighting the need for multicenter collaboration.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: