Suppr超能文献

欧洲心脏手术风险评估系统(EuroSCORE)与欧洲心脏手术风险评估系统II(EuroSCORE II)对比胸外科医师协会风险评估算法

EuroSCORE vs. EuroSCORE II vs. Society of Thoracic Surgeons risk algorithm.

作者信息

Qadir Irfan, Alamzaib Sardar Muhammad, Ahmad Mohammad, Perveen Shazia, Sharif Hasanat

机构信息

Cardiothoracic Surgery Department, Aga Khan University Hospital, Karachi, Pakistan.

出版信息

Asian Cardiovasc Thorac Ann. 2014 Feb;22(2):165-71. doi: 10.1177/0218492313479355. Epub 2013 Jul 11.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION

This study presents a validation series for EuroSCORE II compared with the previous additive and logistic EuroSCORE and the Society of Thoracic Surgeons risk prediction algorithm.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Clinical data of 2004 patients undergoing isolated coronary artery bypass surgery between 2006 and 2010 were retrospectively collected and individual expected risks of death were calculated by all 3 risk prediction algorithms. Performance of these risk algorithms was evaluated in terms of discrimination and calibration.

RESULTS

There were 76 deaths (3.8%) among 2004 patients. The mean EuroSCORE II predicted mortality was 3.72% ± 5.11%, additive EuroSCORE was 4.35%  ± 3.65% and logistic EuroSCORE was 6.41%  ± 10.06%. The additive EuroSCORE was better than EuroSCORE II in terms of both discrimination and calibration (C-statistic 0.866 and Hosmer-Lemeshow p value 0.230 vs. C-statistic 0.836 and Hosmer-Lemeshow p value 0.013 for EuroSCORE II). In a subset of 380 patients, we compared EuroSCORE II with the Society of Thoracic Surgeons risk prediction. Actual mortality was 2.89%. Predicted mortality by EuroSCORE II was 4.27%  ± 5.22% and Society of Thoracic Surgeons risk prediction was 2.30%  ± 4.16%. The area under the curve was 0.759 for EuroSCORE II and 0.898 for the Society of Thoracic Surgeons risk prediction, whereas the Hosmer-Lemeshow p value was 0.267 for EuroSCORE II and 0.981 for Society of Thoracic Surgeons risk prediction.

CONCLUSION

The Society of Thoracic Surgeons risk prediction algorithm is a better risk assessment tool compared to additive and logistic EuroSCORE and EuroSCORE II in Pakistani patients.

摘要

引言

本研究呈现了与先前的累加式和逻辑回归欧洲心脏手术风险评估系统(EuroSCORE)以及胸外科医师协会风险预测算法相比的欧洲心脏手术风险评估系统II(EuroSCORE II)的验证系列。

患者与方法

回顾性收集了2004例在2006年至2010年间接受单纯冠状动脉搭桥手术患者的临床数据,并通过所有3种风险预测算法计算个体预期死亡风险。根据区分度和校准度对这些风险算法的性能进行评估。

结果

2004例患者中有76例死亡(3.8%)。欧洲心脏手术风险评估系统II预测的平均死亡率为3.72%±5.11%,累加式欧洲心脏手术风险评估系统为4.35%±3.65%,逻辑回归欧洲心脏手术风险评估系统为6.41%±10.06%。就区分度和校准度而言,累加式欧洲心脏手术风险评估系统优于欧洲心脏手术风险评估系统II(C统计量0.866和Hosmer-Lemeshow p值0.230,而欧洲心脏手术风险评估系统II的C统计量为0.836,Hosmer-Lemeshow p值为0.013)。在380例患者的亚组中,我们将欧洲心脏手术风险评估系统II与胸外科医师协会风险预测进行了比较。实际死亡率为2.89%。欧洲心脏手术风险评估系统II预测的死亡率为4.27%±5.22%,胸外科医师协会风险预测为2.30%±4.16%。欧洲心脏手术风险评估系统II的曲线下面积为0.759,胸外科医师协会风险预测为0.898,而欧洲心脏手术风险评估系统II的Hosmer-Lemeshow p值为0.267,胸外科医师协会风险预测为0.981。

结论

在巴基斯坦患者中,与累加式和逻辑回归欧洲心脏手术风险评估系统以及欧洲心脏手术风险评估系统II相比,胸外科医师协会风险预测算法是一种更好的风险评估工具。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验