Prediction of Bleeding After Cardiac Surgery: Comparison of Model Performances: A Prospective Observational Study
Objectives Primary aims were to (1) perform external validation of the Papworth Bleeding Risk Score, and (2) compare the usefulness of the Dyke et al universal definition of perioperative bleeding with that used in the Papworth Bleeding Risk Score. A secondary aim was to use a locally developed logi...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of cardiothoracic and vascular anesthesia 2015-04, Vol.29 (2), p.311-319 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 319 |
---|---|
container_issue | 2 |
container_start_page | 311 |
container_title | Journal of cardiothoracic and vascular anesthesia |
container_volume | 29 |
creator | Greiff, Guri, MD Pleym, Hilde, MD, PhD Stenseth, Roar, MD, PhD Berg, Kristin S., MD Wahba, Alexander, MD, PhD Videm, Vibeke, MD, PhD |
description | Objectives Primary aims were to (1) perform external validation of the Papworth Bleeding Risk Score, and (2) compare the usefulness of the Dyke et al universal definition of perioperative bleeding with that used in the Papworth Bleeding Risk Score. A secondary aim was to use a locally developed logistic prediction model for severe postoperative bleeding to investigate whether prediction could be improved with inclusion of the variable “surgeon” or selected intraoperative variables. Design Single-center prospective observational study. Setting University hospital. Participants 7,030 adults undergoing cardiac surgery. Interventions None. Measurements and Main Results Papworth Bleeding Risk Score could identify the group of patients with low risk of postoperative bleeding, with negative predictive value of 0.98, when applying the Papworth Score on this population. The positive predictive value was low; only 15% of the patients who were rated high risk actually suffered from increased postoperative bleeding when using the Papworth Score on this population. Using the universal definition of perioperative bleeding proposed by Dyke et al, 28% of patients in the Papworth high-risk group exceeded the threshold of excessive bleeding in this population. The local models showed low ability for discrimination (area under the receiver operating characteristics curve |
doi_str_mv | 10.1053/j.jvca.2014.08.002 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1665120265</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S1053077014003590</els_id><sourcerecordid>1665120265</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c481t-ee0d6daaf57a9b8a24f495d3b566b87142257ee64f4b852df113a90fd02e0733</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kc1u1DAUhS0EoqXwAiyQl2wSru04PxVCGka0IBV1pOnecuybyiGJp3Yy0rw9jqawYMHKP_rukc9nQt4zyBlI8anP-6PROQdW5FDnAPwFuWRS8KwuOH-Z9onKoKrggryJsQdgTMrqNbngUvKmEPUledoFtM7Mzk_Ud_TrgOk4PdJNN2OgWx2s04bul_CI4XRNt3486ODimf7pLQ50h6HzYdSTwXhNN3QXfDxgijwivW8jhqNe4_VA9_NiT2_Jq04PEd89r1fk4ebbw_Z7dnd_-2O7uctMUbM5QwRbWq07WemmrTUvuqKRVrSyLNu6YqmhrBDLdN3WktuOMaEb6CxwhEqIK_LxHHsI_mnBOKvRRYPDoCf0S1SsLCXjwEuZUH5GTXp5DNipQ3CjDifFQK0OVa9W02o1raBWyXQa-vCcv7Qj2r8jf9Qm4PMZwFTy6DCoaBwmSdaFZEdZ7_6f_-WfcTO4yRk9_MITxt4vISlNPVTkCtR-zVm_mhUAQjYgfgN9x6TK</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1665120265</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Prediction of Bleeding After Cardiac Surgery: Comparison of Model Performances: A Prospective Observational Study</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Access via ScienceDirect (Elsevier)</source><creator>Greiff, Guri, MD ; Pleym, Hilde, MD, PhD ; Stenseth, Roar, MD, PhD ; Berg, Kristin S., MD ; Wahba, Alexander, MD, PhD ; Videm, Vibeke, MD, PhD</creator><creatorcontrib>Greiff, Guri, MD ; Pleym, Hilde, MD, PhD ; Stenseth, Roar, MD, PhD ; Berg, Kristin S., MD ; Wahba, Alexander, MD, PhD ; Videm, Vibeke, MD, PhD</creatorcontrib><description>Objectives Primary aims were to (1) perform external validation of the Papworth Bleeding Risk Score, and (2) compare the usefulness of the Dyke et al universal definition of perioperative bleeding with that used in the Papworth Bleeding Risk Score. A secondary aim was to use a locally developed logistic prediction model for severe postoperative bleeding to investigate whether prediction could be improved with inclusion of the variable “surgeon” or selected intraoperative variables. Design Single-center prospective observational study. Setting University hospital. Participants 7,030 adults undergoing cardiac surgery. Interventions None. Measurements and Main Results Papworth Bleeding Risk Score could identify the group of patients with low risk of postoperative bleeding, with negative predictive value of 0.98, when applying the Papworth Score on this population. The positive predictive value was low; only 15% of the patients who were rated high risk actually suffered from increased postoperative bleeding when using the Papworth Score on this population. Using the universal definition of perioperative bleeding proposed by Dyke et al, 28% of patients in the Papworth high-risk group exceeded the threshold of excessive bleeding in this population. The local models showed low ability for discrimination (area under the receiver operating characteristics curve<0.75). Addition of the factor “surgeon” or selected intraoperative variables did not substantially improve the models. Conclusion Prediction of risk for excessive bleeding after cardiac surgery was not possible using clinical variables only, independent of endpoint definition and inclusion of the variable “surgeon” or of selected intraoperative variables. These findings may be due to incomplete understanding of the causative factors underlying excessive bleeding.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1053-0770</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1532-8422</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1053/j.jvca.2014.08.002</identifier><identifier>PMID: 25529438</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Elsevier Inc</publisher><subject>Aged ; Anesthesia & Perioperative Care ; bleeding endpoint ; cardiac surgery ; Cardiac Surgical Procedures - adverse effects ; Critical Care ; Female ; hemorrhage ; Humans ; Male ; Models, Theoretical ; Postoperative Hemorrhage - diagnosis ; Postoperative Hemorrhage - etiology ; Prospective Studies ; Reproducibility of Results ; Risk Factors ; risk prediction ; risk score ; ROC Curve</subject><ispartof>Journal of cardiothoracic and vascular anesthesia, 2015-04, Vol.29 (2), p.311-319</ispartof><rights>Elsevier Inc.</rights><rights>2015 Elsevier Inc.</rights><rights>Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c481t-ee0d6daaf57a9b8a24f495d3b566b87142257ee64f4b852df113a90fd02e0733</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c481t-ee0d6daaf57a9b8a24f495d3b566b87142257ee64f4b852df113a90fd02e0733</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-8528-5644 ; 0000-0002-4548-0293</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1053/j.jvca.2014.08.002$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>315,781,785,3551,27929,27930,46000</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25529438$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Greiff, Guri, MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pleym, Hilde, MD, PhD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Stenseth, Roar, MD, PhD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Berg, Kristin S., MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wahba, Alexander, MD, PhD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Videm, Vibeke, MD, PhD</creatorcontrib><title>Prediction of Bleeding After Cardiac Surgery: Comparison of Model Performances: A Prospective Observational Study</title><title>Journal of cardiothoracic and vascular anesthesia</title><addtitle>J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth</addtitle><description>Objectives Primary aims were to (1) perform external validation of the Papworth Bleeding Risk Score, and (2) compare the usefulness of the Dyke et al universal definition of perioperative bleeding with that used in the Papworth Bleeding Risk Score. A secondary aim was to use a locally developed logistic prediction model for severe postoperative bleeding to investigate whether prediction could be improved with inclusion of the variable “surgeon” or selected intraoperative variables. Design Single-center prospective observational study. Setting University hospital. Participants 7,030 adults undergoing cardiac surgery. Interventions None. Measurements and Main Results Papworth Bleeding Risk Score could identify the group of patients with low risk of postoperative bleeding, with negative predictive value of 0.98, when applying the Papworth Score on this population. The positive predictive value was low; only 15% of the patients who were rated high risk actually suffered from increased postoperative bleeding when using the Papworth Score on this population. Using the universal definition of perioperative bleeding proposed by Dyke et al, 28% of patients in the Papworth high-risk group exceeded the threshold of excessive bleeding in this population. The local models showed low ability for discrimination (area under the receiver operating characteristics curve<0.75). Addition of the factor “surgeon” or selected intraoperative variables did not substantially improve the models. Conclusion Prediction of risk for excessive bleeding after cardiac surgery was not possible using clinical variables only, independent of endpoint definition and inclusion of the variable “surgeon” or of selected intraoperative variables. These findings may be due to incomplete understanding of the causative factors underlying excessive bleeding.</description><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Anesthesia & Perioperative Care</subject><subject>bleeding endpoint</subject><subject>cardiac surgery</subject><subject>Cardiac Surgical Procedures - adverse effects</subject><subject>Critical Care</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>hemorrhage</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Models, Theoretical</subject><subject>Postoperative Hemorrhage - diagnosis</subject><subject>Postoperative Hemorrhage - etiology</subject><subject>Prospective Studies</subject><subject>Reproducibility of Results</subject><subject>Risk Factors</subject><subject>risk prediction</subject><subject>risk score</subject><subject>ROC Curve</subject><issn>1053-0770</issn><issn>1532-8422</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2015</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kc1u1DAUhS0EoqXwAiyQl2wSru04PxVCGka0IBV1pOnecuybyiGJp3Yy0rw9jqawYMHKP_rukc9nQt4zyBlI8anP-6PROQdW5FDnAPwFuWRS8KwuOH-Z9onKoKrggryJsQdgTMrqNbngUvKmEPUledoFtM7Mzk_Ud_TrgOk4PdJNN2OgWx2s04bul_CI4XRNt3486ODimf7pLQ50h6HzYdSTwXhNN3QXfDxgijwivW8jhqNe4_VA9_NiT2_Jq04PEd89r1fk4ebbw_Z7dnd_-2O7uctMUbM5QwRbWq07WemmrTUvuqKRVrSyLNu6YqmhrBDLdN3WktuOMaEb6CxwhEqIK_LxHHsI_mnBOKvRRYPDoCf0S1SsLCXjwEuZUH5GTXp5DNipQ3CjDifFQK0OVa9W02o1raBWyXQa-vCcv7Qj2r8jf9Qm4PMZwFTy6DCoaBwmSdaFZEdZ7_6f_-WfcTO4yRk9_MITxt4vISlNPVTkCtR-zVm_mhUAQjYgfgN9x6TK</recordid><startdate>20150401</startdate><enddate>20150401</enddate><creator>Greiff, Guri, MD</creator><creator>Pleym, Hilde, MD, PhD</creator><creator>Stenseth, Roar, MD, PhD</creator><creator>Berg, Kristin S., MD</creator><creator>Wahba, Alexander, MD, PhD</creator><creator>Videm, Vibeke, MD, PhD</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8528-5644</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4548-0293</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20150401</creationdate><title>Prediction of Bleeding After Cardiac Surgery: Comparison of Model Performances: A Prospective Observational Study</title><author>Greiff, Guri, MD ; Pleym, Hilde, MD, PhD ; Stenseth, Roar, MD, PhD ; Berg, Kristin S., MD ; Wahba, Alexander, MD, PhD ; Videm, Vibeke, MD, PhD</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c481t-ee0d6daaf57a9b8a24f495d3b566b87142257ee64f4b852df113a90fd02e0733</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2015</creationdate><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Anesthesia & Perioperative Care</topic><topic>bleeding endpoint</topic><topic>cardiac surgery</topic><topic>Cardiac Surgical Procedures - adverse effects</topic><topic>Critical Care</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>hemorrhage</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Models, Theoretical</topic><topic>Postoperative Hemorrhage - diagnosis</topic><topic>Postoperative Hemorrhage - etiology</topic><topic>Prospective Studies</topic><topic>Reproducibility of Results</topic><topic>Risk Factors</topic><topic>risk prediction</topic><topic>risk score</topic><topic>ROC Curve</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Greiff, Guri, MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pleym, Hilde, MD, PhD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Stenseth, Roar, MD, PhD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Berg, Kristin S., MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wahba, Alexander, MD, PhD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Videm, Vibeke, MD, PhD</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Journal of cardiothoracic and vascular anesthesia</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Greiff, Guri, MD</au><au>Pleym, Hilde, MD, PhD</au><au>Stenseth, Roar, MD, PhD</au><au>Berg, Kristin S., MD</au><au>Wahba, Alexander, MD, PhD</au><au>Videm, Vibeke, MD, PhD</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Prediction of Bleeding After Cardiac Surgery: Comparison of Model Performances: A Prospective Observational Study</atitle><jtitle>Journal of cardiothoracic and vascular anesthesia</jtitle><addtitle>J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth</addtitle><date>2015-04-01</date><risdate>2015</risdate><volume>29</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>311</spage><epage>319</epage><pages>311-319</pages><issn>1053-0770</issn><eissn>1532-8422</eissn><abstract>Objectives Primary aims were to (1) perform external validation of the Papworth Bleeding Risk Score, and (2) compare the usefulness of the Dyke et al universal definition of perioperative bleeding with that used in the Papworth Bleeding Risk Score. A secondary aim was to use a locally developed logistic prediction model for severe postoperative bleeding to investigate whether prediction could be improved with inclusion of the variable “surgeon” or selected intraoperative variables. Design Single-center prospective observational study. Setting University hospital. Participants 7,030 adults undergoing cardiac surgery. Interventions None. Measurements and Main Results Papworth Bleeding Risk Score could identify the group of patients with low risk of postoperative bleeding, with negative predictive value of 0.98, when applying the Papworth Score on this population. The positive predictive value was low; only 15% of the patients who were rated high risk actually suffered from increased postoperative bleeding when using the Papworth Score on this population. Using the universal definition of perioperative bleeding proposed by Dyke et al, 28% of patients in the Papworth high-risk group exceeded the threshold of excessive bleeding in this population. The local models showed low ability for discrimination (area under the receiver operating characteristics curve<0.75). Addition of the factor “surgeon” or selected intraoperative variables did not substantially improve the models. Conclusion Prediction of risk for excessive bleeding after cardiac surgery was not possible using clinical variables only, independent of endpoint definition and inclusion of the variable “surgeon” or of selected intraoperative variables. These findings may be due to incomplete understanding of the causative factors underlying excessive bleeding.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><pmid>25529438</pmid><doi>10.1053/j.jvca.2014.08.002</doi><tpages>9</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8528-5644</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4548-0293</orcidid></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1053-0770 |
ispartof | Journal of cardiothoracic and vascular anesthesia, 2015-04, Vol.29 (2), p.311-319 |
issn | 1053-0770 1532-8422 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1665120265 |
source | MEDLINE; Access via ScienceDirect (Elsevier) |
subjects | Aged Anesthesia & Perioperative Care bleeding endpoint cardiac surgery Cardiac Surgical Procedures - adverse effects Critical Care Female hemorrhage Humans Male Models, Theoretical Postoperative Hemorrhage - diagnosis Postoperative Hemorrhage - etiology Prospective Studies Reproducibility of Results Risk Factors risk prediction risk score ROC Curve |
title | Prediction of Bleeding After Cardiac Surgery: Comparison of Model Performances: A Prospective Observational Study |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-16T07%3A34%3A38IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Prediction%20of%20Bleeding%20After%20Cardiac%20Surgery:%20Comparison%20of%20Model%20Performances:%20A%20Prospective%20Observational%20Study&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20cardiothoracic%20and%20vascular%20anesthesia&rft.au=Greiff,%20Guri,%20MD&rft.date=2015-04-01&rft.volume=29&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=311&rft.epage=319&rft.pages=311-319&rft.issn=1053-0770&rft.eissn=1532-8422&rft_id=info:doi/10.1053/j.jvca.2014.08.002&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1665120265%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1665120265&rft_id=info:pmid/25529438&rft_els_id=S1053077014003590&rfr_iscdi=true |