From the Division of Burns, Trauma and Critical Care, Department of Surgery (E.H., M.C., H.P.), University of Texas at Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas; Department of Clinical Pathology (M.M.), Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts; Division of Trauma and Critical Care, Department of Surgery (E.M.), School of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington; Division of Trauma, Critical Care, and Acute Care Surgery (M.S.), School of Medicine, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, Oregon; Division of Trauma and Critical Care, Department of Surgery (K.B.), Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, Wisconsin; Division of General Surgery, Department of Surgery (M.J., P.M.), School of Medicine, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California; Division of Trauma, Department of Surgery (J.M.), School of Medicine, University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, San Antonio, Texas; Division of Trauma and General Surgery, Department of Surgery (L.A.), School of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania; Biostatistics/Epidemiology/Research Design Core (M.R., E.F., D.d.J.), Center for Clinical and Translational Sciences, Division of Epidemiology, Human Genetics, and Environmental Sciences (M.R.), School of Public Health, and Center for Translational Injury Research, Division of Acute Care Surgery, Department of Surgery (J.H., B.C., E.F., D.d.J., C.W.), Medical School, University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, Houston, Texas.
J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2018 Feb;84(2):397-402. doi: 10.1097/TA.0000000000001756.
Previously, a model to predict massive transfusion protocol (MTP) (activation) was derived using a single-institution data set. The PRospective, Observational, Multicenter, Major Trauma Transfusion database was used to externally validate this model's ability to predict both MTP activation and massive transfusion (MT) administration using multiple MT definitions.
The app model was used to calculate the predicted probability of MTP activation or MT delivery. The five definitions of MT used were: (1) 10 units packed red blood cells (PRBCs) in 24 hours, (2) Resuscitation Intensity score ≥ 4, (3) critical administration threshold, (4) 4 units PRBCs in 4 hours; and (5) 6 units PRBCs in 6 hours. Receiver operating curves were plotted to compare the predicted probability of MT with observed outcomes.
Of 1,245 patients in the data set, 297 (24%) met definition 1, 570 (47%) met definition 2, 364 (33%) met definition 3, 599 met definition 4 (49.1%), and 395 met definition 5 (32.4%). Regardless of the outcome (MTP activation or MT administration), the predictive ability of the app model was consistent: when predicting activation of the MTP, the area under the curve for the model was 0.694 and when predicting MT administration, the area under the curve ranged from 0.695 to 0.711.
Regardless of the definition of MT used, the app model demonstrates moderate ability to predict the need for MT in an external, homogenous population. Importantly, the app allows the model to be iteratively recalibrated ("machine learning") and thus could improve its predictive capability as additional data are accrued.
Diagnostic test study/Prognostic study, level III.
此前,使用单机构数据集推导了预测大量输血方案(MTP)(激活)的模型。前瞻性、观察性、多中心、严重创伤输血数据库用于外部验证该模型预测 MTP 激活和使用多种 MT 定义进行大量输血(MT)的能力。
应用模型用于计算 MTP 激活或 MT 交付的预测概率。使用的五种 MT 定义是:(1)24 小时内 10 个单位浓缩红细胞(PRBC),(2)复苏强度评分≥4,(3)临界给药阈值,(4)4 个单位 PRBC 在 4 小时内;和(5)6 个单位 PRBC 在 6 小时内。绘制了接收器工作曲线以比较 MT 的预测概率与观察结果。
在数据集的 1245 名患者中,297 名(24%)符合定义 1,570 名(47%)符合定义 2,364 名(33%)符合定义 3,599 名(49.1%)符合定义 4,395 名(32.4%)符合定义 5。无论结果(MTP 激活或 MT 管理)如何,应用模型的预测能力都是一致的:当预测 MTP 激活时,模型的曲线下面积为 0.694,当预测 MT 管理时,曲线下面积范围为 0.695 至 0.711。
无论使用哪种 MT 定义,应用模型都能在外部同质人群中对 MT 的需求进行中等程度的预测。重要的是,该应用程序允许对模型进行迭代重新校准(“机器学习”),因此随着更多数据的累积,其预测能力可能会提高。
诊断测试研究/预后研究,III 级。