Key result
EuroSCORE-II outperforms POSPOM for predicting in-hospital mortality after cardiac surgery.
Why the study?
The reliability of simpler generalized risk scores like POSPOM for predicting in-hospital mortality in cardiac surgery remains uncertain compared with EuroSCORE-II.
Does POSPOM provide comparable predictive performance to EuroSCORE-II for predicting in-hospital mortality in adult patients undergoing cardiac surgery?
Cohort (n=320)
No
Does POSPOM provide comparable predictive performance to EuroSCORE-II for predicting in-hospital mortality in adult patients undergoing cardiac surgery?
Effect estimate: AUC 0.611 vs. 0.745
Absolute Event Rate: 0.611% vs 0.745%
p-value: p=0.012
The generalized surgical risk score POSPOM underperforms compared to the cardiac-specific EuroSCORE-II for predicting in-hospital mortality in cardiac surgery patients and should not replace cardiac-specific risk models.
POSPOM showed inferior discrimination to EuroSCORE-II in this cohort; leaves open whether generalized scores can match cardiac-specific models.
Background: Simpler generalized scores such as POSPOM (PreOperative Score to Predict Post-Operative Mortality) may appear attractive because they can be derived from routinely available variables and applied across surgical specialties, although their reliability in cardiac surgery remains uncertain. Aim: To compare the performance of POSPOM and EuroSCORE-II scores for predicting in-hospital mortality among patients undergoing cardiac surgery. Methods: This retrospective observational cohort study was conducted at a single tertiary university cardiac surgery center. A total of 320 adult patients (≥18 years) who underwent coronary artery bypass grafting, valve surgery, or combined procedures between 2021 and 2024 were included. Discrimination was assessed using ROC and precision–recall curves with DeLong’s test. Calibration was evaluated using calibration-in-the-large, calibration slope, Hosmer–Lemeshow testing, and GiViTI calibration belts. Agreement was analyzed using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), Concordance Correlation Coefficient (CCC), Bland– Altman plots, and Passing–Bablok and Deming regression. Results: In-hospital mortality was 7.5% (24/320). POSPOM showed poorer discrimination than EuroSCORE-II (AUC 0.611 vs. 0.745; P = 0.012) and lower PR-AUC (0.115 vs. 0.287). Both models showed imperfect calibration, and agreement between scores was weak (ICC 0.283), with systematic differences observed between predicted mortality estimates. Exploratory segmented regression suggested that inter-model divergence increased with age, with an estimated breakpoint near 59 years. POSPOM did not improve reclassification (continuous NRI –0.31), and decision curve analysis favored EuroSCORE-II. Conclusion: POSPOM showed poorer predictive performance than EuroSCORE-II for in-hospital mortality after cardiac surgery. However, these findings should be interpreted cautiously in light of the limited number of mortality events, retrospective reconstruction of POSPOM, and the need for external validation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Altun et al. (2026) conducted a cohort in Cardiac surgery (coronary artery bypass grafting, valve surgery, or combined procedures) (n=320). POSPOM (PreOperative Score to Predict Post-Operative Mortality) vs. EuroSCORE-II was evaluated on Predictive discrimination (AUC) for in-hospital mortality (AUC 0.611 vs. 0.745, p=0.012). POSPOM demonstrated significantly poorer discrimination than EuroSCORE-II for predicting in-hospital mortality after cardiac surgery (AUC 0.611 vs. 0.745; P = 0.012).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: