Key result
The ASSIST risk score outperformed 6 existing risk scores in predicting surgical site infections after coronary artery bypass grafting (P < 0.0001).
Why the study?
The study was conducted to develop a risk score for surgical site infections after coronary artery bypass grafting.
Does the ASSIST risk score accurately predict surgical site infections after CABG compared to existing risk scores?
Observational (n=9,750)
No
Does the ASSIST risk score accurately predict surgical site infections after CABG compared to existing risk scores?
The ASSIST risk score provides a more accurate prediction of surgical site infections after CABG compared to existing risk scores.
May enhance SSI risk stratification after CABG; leaves open prospective validation before clinical adoption.
OBJECTIVE: To develop a risk score for surgical site infections (SSIs) after coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). DESIGN: Retrospective study. SETTING: University hospital. PATIENTS: A derivation sample of 7,090 consecutive isolated or combined CABG patients and 2 validation samples (2,660 total patients). METHODS: Predictors of SSIs were identified by multivariable analyses from the derivation sample, and a risk stratification tool (additive and logistic) for all SSIs after CABG (acronym, ASSIST) was created. Accuracy of prediction was evaluated with C-statistic and compared 1:1 (using the Hanley-McNeil method) with most relevant risk scores for SSIs after CABG. Both internal (1,000 bootstrap replications) and external validation were performed. RESULTS: SSIs occurred in 724 (10.2%) cases and 2 models of ASSIST were created, including either baseline patient characteristics alone or combined with other perioperative factors. Female gender, body mass index >29.3 kg/m2, diabetes, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, extracardiac arteriopathy, angina at rest, and nonelective surgical priority were predictors of SSIs common to both models, which outperformed (P < .0001) 6 specific risk scores (10 models) for SSIs after CABG. Although ASSIST performed differently in the 2 validation samples, in both, as well as in the derivation data set, the combined model outweighed (albeit not always significantly) the preoperative-only model, both for additive and logistic ASSIST. CONCLUSIONS: In the derivation data set, ASSIST outperformed specific risk scores in predicting SSIs after CABG. The combined model had a higher accuracy of prediction than the preoperative-only model both in the derivation and validation samples. Additive and logistic ASSIST showed equivalent performance.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Gatti et al. (2020) conducted an observational in Coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) (n=9,750). ASSIST risk score vs. 6 specific existing risk scores was evaluated on Surgical site infections (SSIs) (p=<.0001). The ASSIST risk score outperformed 6 existing risk scores in predicting surgical site infections after coronary artery bypass grafting (P < 0.0001).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: