Dunn Colin P, Emeasoba Emmanuel U, Holtzman Ari J, Hung Michael, Kaminetsky Joshua, Alani Omar, Greenstein Stuart M
Department of Surgery, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, 10461 Bronx, NY, USA.
The Montefiore Einstein Center for Transplantation, Montefiore Medical Center, Bronx, 111 East 210 Street, 10467 NY, USA.
Surg Res Pract. 2019 Mar 20;2019:9080856. doi: 10.1155/2019/9080856. eCollection 2019.
Patients undergoing kidney transplantation have increased risk of adverse cardiovascular events due to histories of hypertension, end-stage renal disease, and dialysis. As such, they are especially in need of accurate preoperative risk assessment.
We compared three different risk assessment models for their ability to predict major adverse cardiac events at 30 days and 1 year after transplant. These were the PORT model, the RCRI model, and the Gupta model. We used a method based on generalized U-statistics to determine statistically significant improvements in the area under the receiver operator curve (AUC), based on a common major adverse cardiac event (MACE) definition. For the top-performing model, we added new covariates into multivariable logistic regression in an attempt to create further improvement in the AUC.
The AUCs for MACE at 30 days and 1 year were 0.645 and 0.650 (PORT), 0.633 and 0.661 (RCRI), and finally 0.489 and 0.557 (Gupta), respectively. The PORT model performed significantly better than the Gupta model at 1 year (=0.039). When the sensitivity was set to 95%, PORT had a significantly higher specificity of 0.227 compared to RCRI's 0.071 (=0.009) and Gupta's 0.08 (=0.017). Our additional covariates increased the receiver operator curve from 0.664 to 0.703, but this did not reach statistical significance (=0.278).
Of the three calculators, PORT performed best when the sensitivity was set at a clinically relevant level. This is likely due to the unique variables the PORT model uses, which are specific to transplant patients.
由于高血压病史、终末期肾病和透析史,接受肾移植的患者发生不良心血管事件的风险增加。因此,他们尤其需要准确的术前风险评估。
我们比较了三种不同的风险评估模型预测移植后30天和1年主要不良心脏事件的能力。这三种模型分别是PORT模型、RCRI模型和Gupta模型。我们使用基于广义U统计量的方法,根据常见的主要不良心脏事件(MACE)定义,确定受试者操作特征曲线(AUC)下面积的统计学显著改善。对于表现最佳的模型,我们在多变量逻辑回归中添加了新的协变量,试图进一步提高AUC。
30天和1年时MACE的AUC分别为0.645和0.650(PORT)、0.633和0.661(RCRI),最后分别为0.489和0.557(Gupta)。PORT模型在1年时的表现明显优于Gupta模型(=0.039)。当敏感性设定为95%时,PORT的特异性显著高于RCRI(0.071,=0.009)和Gupta(0.08,=0.017),分别为0.227。我们添加的协变量使受试者操作特征曲线从0.664提高到0.703,但这未达到统计学显著性(=0.278)。
在这三种计算方法中,当敏感性设定在临床相关水平时,PORT表现最佳。这可能是由于PORT模型使用的独特变量,这些变量是移植患者所特有的。