Cohn Steven L, Fernandez Ros Nerea
Division of Hospital Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, Florida; Medical Consultation Service, Jackson Memorial Hospital, Miami, Florida.
Hospital Medicine Division, Department of Internal Medicine, Clinica Universidad de Navarra, Pamplona, Spain.
Am J Cardiol. 2018 Jan 1;121(1):125-130. doi: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2017.09.031. Epub 2017 Oct 13.
The 2014 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Perioperative Guidelines suggest using the Revised Cardiac Risk Index, myocardial infarction or cardiac arrest, or American College of Surgeons-National Surgical Quality Improvement Program calculators for combined patient-surgical risk assessment. There are no published data comparing their performance. This study compared these risk calculators and a reconstructed Revised Cardiac Risk Index in predicting postoperative cardiac complications, both during hospitalization and 30 days after operation, in a patient cohort who underwent select surgical procedures in various risk categories. Cardiac complications occurred in 14 of 663 patients (2.1%), of which 11 occurred during hospitalization. Only 3 of 663 patients (0.45%) had a myocardial infarction or cardiac arrest. Because these calculators used different risk factors, different outcomes, and different durations of observation, a true direct comparison is not possible. We found that all 4 risk calculators performed well in the setting they were originally studied but were less accurate when applied in a different manner. In conclusion, all calculators were useful in defining low-risk patients in whom further cardiac testing was unnecessary, and the myocardial infarction or cardiac arrest may be the most reliable in selecting higher risk patients.
2014年美国心脏病学会/美国心脏协会围手术期指南建议使用修订的心脏风险指数、心肌梗死或心脏骤停,或美国外科医师学会-国家外科质量改进计划计算器进行患者手术风险综合评估。尚无比较它们性能的已发表数据。本研究比较了这些风险计算器以及一个重构的修订心脏风险指数在预测不同风险类别的择期手术患者住院期间及术后30天的术后心脏并发症方面的情况。663例患者中有14例(2.1%)发生心脏并发症,其中11例发生在住院期间。663例患者中只有3例(0.45%)发生心肌梗死或心脏骤停。由于这些计算器使用了不同的风险因素、不同的结局和不同的观察时长,因此无法进行真正的直接比较。我们发现,所有4种风险计算器在其最初研究的背景下表现良好,但以不同方式应用时准确性较低。总之,所有计算器在确定无需进一步心脏检查的低风险患者方面都很有用,而心肌梗死或心脏骤停在选择高风险患者方面可能最可靠。