Key result
The EuroSCORE II risk model demonstrated strong discriminative power for in-hospital mortality (AUC 0.871), outperforming the additive EuroSCORE I (AUC 0.840) in a Dutch cardiac surgery cohort.
Why the study?
Does the EuroSCORE II risk model improve prediction of in-hospital mortality compared to EuroSCORE I in cardiac surgery patients?
Population
2,296 consecutive cardiac surgery patients at a single Dutch hospital between April 2012 and January 2014
Comparison
EuroSCORE II risk prediction model vs EuroSCORE I risk prediction models
Design
Cohort
Follow-up
in-hospital
Authors
Loading...
Supports EuroSCORE II for cardiac surgery risk assessment; extends prior validations yet leaves prospective confirmation open.
Cohort (n=2,296)
No
Does the EuroSCORE II risk model improve prediction of in-hospital mortality compared to EuroSCORE I in cardiac surgery patients?
Absolute Event Rate: 0.871% vs 0.84%
EuroSCORE II provides better discriminative power for predicting in-hospital mortality after cardiac surgery compared to EuroSCORE I, though it may slightly underestimate absolute risk.
Hogervorst et al. (2018) conducted a cohort in Cardiac surgery (n=2,296). EuroSCORE II risk model vs. EuroSCORE I risk model was evaluated on Discriminative power for in-hospital mortality (Area Under the Curve) (95% CI 0.832-0.911). The EuroSCORE II risk model demonstrated strong discriminative power for in-hospital mortality (AUC 0.871), outperforming the additive EuroSCORE I (AUC 0.840) in a Dutch cardiac surgery cohort.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: