Bridgewater B, Neve H, Moat N, Hooper T, Jones M
Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Wythenshawe Hospital, Manchester, UK.
Heart. 1998 Apr;79(4):350-5. doi: 10.1136/hrt.79.4.350.
To compare the ability of four risk models to predict operative mortality after coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG) in the United Kingdom.
Prospective study.
Two cardiothoracic centres in the United Kingdom.
1774 patients having CABG.
Risk factors were recorded for all patients, along with in-hospital mortality. Predicted mortality was derived from the American Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) risk program, Ontario Province risk score (PACCN), Parsonnet score, and the UK Society of Cardiothoracic Surgeons risk algorithm.
There were significant differences (p < 0.05) between the British and American populations from which the STS risk algorithm was derived with respect to most variables. The observed mortality in the British population was 3.7% (65 of 1774). The mean predicted mortality by STS score, PACCN, Parsonnet score, and UK algorithms were 1.1%, 1.6%, 4.6%, and 4.7% respectively. The overall predictive ability of the models as measured by the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve were 0.64, 0.60, 0.73, and 0.75, respectively.
There are differences between the British and American populations for CABG and the North American algorithms are not useful for predicting mortality in the United Kingdom. The UK Society of Cardiothoracic Surgeons algorithm is the best of the models tested but still only has limited predictive ability. Great care must be exercised when using methods of this type for comparisons of units and surgeons.
比较四种风险模型预测英国冠状动脉旁路移植术(CABG)术后手术死亡率的能力。
前瞻性研究。
英国的两个心胸外科中心。
1774例行CABG的患者。
记录所有患者的风险因素以及住院死亡率。预测死亡率来自美国胸外科医师协会(STS)风险程序、安大略省风险评分(PACCN)、帕森内特评分以及英国心胸外科医师协会风险算法。
推导STS风险算法所依据的英国和美国人群在大多数变量方面存在显著差异(p<0.05)。英国人群的观察到的死亡率为3.7%(1774例中的65例)。STS评分、PACCN、帕森内特评分和英国算法预测的平均死亡率分别为1.1%、1.6%、4.6%和4.7%。通过受试者工作特征曲线下面积衡量的模型总体预测能力分别为0.64、0.60、0.73和0.75。
CABG的英国和美国人群之间存在差异,北美算法对预测英国的死亡率无用。英国心胸外科医师协会算法是所测试模型中最好的,但预测能力仍然有限。在使用这类方法比较不同单位和外科医生时必须格外谨慎。