Risk stratification in heart surgery: comparison of six score systems
Objective: Risk scores have become an important tool in patient assessment, as age, severity of heart disease, and comorbidity in patients undergoing heart surgery have considerably increased. Various risk scores have been developed to predict mortality after heart surgery. However, there are signif...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | European journal of cardio-thoracic surgery 2000-04, Vol.17 (4), p.400-406 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 406 |
---|---|
container_issue | 4 |
container_start_page | 400 |
container_title | European journal of cardio-thoracic surgery |
container_volume | 17 |
creator | Geissler, Hans J. Hölzl, Philipp Marohl, Sascha Kuhn-Régnier, Ferdinand Mehlhorn, Uwe Südkamp, Michael de Vivie, E. Rainer |
description | Objective: Risk scores have become an important tool in patient assessment, as age, severity of heart disease, and comorbidity in patients undergoing heart surgery have considerably increased. Various risk scores have been developed to predict mortality after heart surgery. However, there are significant differences between scores with regard to score design and the initial patient population on which score development was based. It was the purpose of our study to compare six commonly used risk scores with regard to their validity in our patient population. Methods: Between September 1, 1998 and February 28, 1999, all adult patients undergoing heart surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass in our institution were preoperatively scored using the initial Parsonnet, Cleveland Clinic, French, Euro, Pons, and Ontario Province Risk (OPR) scores. Postoperatively, we registered 30-day mortality, use of mechanical assist devices, renal failure requiring hemodialysis or hemofiltration, stroke, myocardial infarction, and duration of ventilation and intensive care stay. Score validity was assessed by calculating the area under the ROC curve. Odds ratios were calculated to investigate the predictive relevance of risk factors. Results: Follow-up was able to be completed in 504 prospectively scored patients. Receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curve analysis for mortality showed the best predictive value for the Euro score. Predictive values for morbidity were considerably lower than predictive values for mortality in all of the investigated score systems. For most risk factors, odds ratios for mortality were substantially different from ratios for morbidity. Conclusions: Among the investigated scores, the Euro score yielded the highest predictive value in our patient population. For most risk factors, predictive values for morbidity were substantially different from predictive values for mortality. Therefore, development of specific morbidity risk scores may improve prediction of outcome and hospital cost. Due to the heterogeneity of morbidity events, future score systems may have to generate separate predictions for mortality and major morbidity events. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1016/S1010-7940(00)00385-7 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_71048089</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><oup_id>10.1016/S1010-7940(00)00385-7</oup_id><sourcerecordid>71048089</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c547t-5a45be7e001ee0908de7e323c4d604f35ea5ed37d950322a7a5b8c194427c6733</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNptkF2L1DAUhoMozjj6E1Z6IeJeRE-apKf1TpbdHXEZwQ9YvAmZNNXsTKdjTgs7_97UjqsLQsgHed7zwsPYiYDXAkTx5nPagWOl4BXAKYAsNccHbC5KlBylun6Y7n-QGXtCdAMAhczxMZsJQJS6yOfs_FOgTUZ9tH1ogkt7t8vCLvvhbewzGuJ3Hw9vM9e1exsDpc-uySjcZuS66DM6UO9besoeNXZL_tnxXLCvF-dfzpb86uPl-7N3V9xphT3XVum1Rw8gvIcKyjo9ZC6dqgtQjdTeal9LrCsNMs8tWr0unaiUytEVKOWCvZzm7mP3c_DUmzaQ89ut3fluIIMCVAlllUA9gS52RNE3Zh9Da-PBCDCjP_PbnxnlGBhX8mcw5Z4fC4Z16-t_UpOwBLw4Apac3TbR7lygv5zUKFEnDCasG_b_r-b3qvlYzadISEpv70I2bkwxzjTL62_mQokPqwIqs5K_AAchlFQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>71048089</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Risk stratification in heart surgery: comparison of six score systems</title><source>Oxford University Press Journals All Titles (1996-Current)</source><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><creator>Geissler, Hans J. ; Hölzl, Philipp ; Marohl, Sascha ; Kuhn-Régnier, Ferdinand ; Mehlhorn, Uwe ; Südkamp, Michael ; de Vivie, E. Rainer</creator><creatorcontrib>Geissler, Hans J. ; Hölzl, Philipp ; Marohl, Sascha ; Kuhn-Régnier, Ferdinand ; Mehlhorn, Uwe ; Südkamp, Michael ; de Vivie, E. Rainer</creatorcontrib><description>Objective: Risk scores have become an important tool in patient assessment, as age, severity of heart disease, and comorbidity in patients undergoing heart surgery have considerably increased. Various risk scores have been developed to predict mortality after heart surgery. However, there are significant differences between scores with regard to score design and the initial patient population on which score development was based. It was the purpose of our study to compare six commonly used risk scores with regard to their validity in our patient population. Methods: Between September 1, 1998 and February 28, 1999, all adult patients undergoing heart surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass in our institution were preoperatively scored using the initial Parsonnet, Cleveland Clinic, French, Euro, Pons, and Ontario Province Risk (OPR) scores. Postoperatively, we registered 30-day mortality, use of mechanical assist devices, renal failure requiring hemodialysis or hemofiltration, stroke, myocardial infarction, and duration of ventilation and intensive care stay. Score validity was assessed by calculating the area under the ROC curve. Odds ratios were calculated to investigate the predictive relevance of risk factors. Results: Follow-up was able to be completed in 504 prospectively scored patients. Receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curve analysis for mortality showed the best predictive value for the Euro score. Predictive values for morbidity were considerably lower than predictive values for mortality in all of the investigated score systems. For most risk factors, odds ratios for mortality were substantially different from ratios for morbidity. Conclusions: Among the investigated scores, the Euro score yielded the highest predictive value in our patient population. For most risk factors, predictive values for morbidity were substantially different from predictive values for mortality. Therefore, development of specific morbidity risk scores may improve prediction of outcome and hospital cost. Due to the heterogeneity of morbidity events, future score systems may have to generate separate predictions for mortality and major morbidity events.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1010-7940</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1873-734X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/S1010-7940(00)00385-7</identifier><identifier>PMID: 10773562</identifier><identifier>CODEN: EJCSE7</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Amsterdam: Elsevier Science B.V</publisher><subject>Adult ; Aged ; Biological and medical sciences ; Cardiac surgery ; Cardiac Surgical Procedures - methods ; Cardiac Surgical Procedures - mortality ; Cardiopulmonary Bypass - methods ; Cardiopulmonary Bypass - mortality ; Evaluation Studies as Topic ; Female ; Germany ; Heart Diseases - diagnosis ; Heart Diseases - mortality ; Heart Diseases - surgery ; Humans ; Male ; Medical sciences ; Middle Aged ; Morbidity ; Mortality ; Odds Ratio ; Predictive Value of Tests ; Probability ; Risk Assessment ; Risk factor ; Risk Factors ; Risk score ; ROC Curve ; Sensitivity and Specificity ; Severity of Illness Index ; Surgery (general aspects). Transplantations, organ and tissue grafts. Graft diseases ; Surgery of the heart ; Survival Analysis ; Survival Rate</subject><ispartof>European journal of cardio-thoracic surgery, 2000-04, Vol.17 (4), p.400-406</ispartof><rights>Elsevier Science B.V. © 2000 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved. 2000</rights><rights>2000 INIST-CNRS</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c547t-5a45be7e001ee0908de7e323c4d604f35ea5ed37d950322a7a5b8c194427c6733</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c547t-5a45be7e001ee0908de7e323c4d604f35ea5ed37d950322a7a5b8c194427c6733</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>309,310,314,776,780,785,786,23909,23910,25118,27901,27902</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=1357375$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10773562$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Geissler, Hans J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hölzl, Philipp</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Marohl, Sascha</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kuhn-Régnier, Ferdinand</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mehlhorn, Uwe</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Südkamp, Michael</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>de Vivie, E. Rainer</creatorcontrib><title>Risk stratification in heart surgery: comparison of six score systems</title><title>European journal of cardio-thoracic surgery</title><addtitle>Eur J Cardiothorac Surg</addtitle><addtitle>Eur J Cardiothorac Surg</addtitle><description>Objective: Risk scores have become an important tool in patient assessment, as age, severity of heart disease, and comorbidity in patients undergoing heart surgery have considerably increased. Various risk scores have been developed to predict mortality after heart surgery. However, there are significant differences between scores with regard to score design and the initial patient population on which score development was based. It was the purpose of our study to compare six commonly used risk scores with regard to their validity in our patient population. Methods: Between September 1, 1998 and February 28, 1999, all adult patients undergoing heart surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass in our institution were preoperatively scored using the initial Parsonnet, Cleveland Clinic, French, Euro, Pons, and Ontario Province Risk (OPR) scores. Postoperatively, we registered 30-day mortality, use of mechanical assist devices, renal failure requiring hemodialysis or hemofiltration, stroke, myocardial infarction, and duration of ventilation and intensive care stay. Score validity was assessed by calculating the area under the ROC curve. Odds ratios were calculated to investigate the predictive relevance of risk factors. Results: Follow-up was able to be completed in 504 prospectively scored patients. Receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curve analysis for mortality showed the best predictive value for the Euro score. Predictive values for morbidity were considerably lower than predictive values for mortality in all of the investigated score systems. For most risk factors, odds ratios for mortality were substantially different from ratios for morbidity. Conclusions: Among the investigated scores, the Euro score yielded the highest predictive value in our patient population. For most risk factors, predictive values for morbidity were substantially different from predictive values for mortality. Therefore, development of specific morbidity risk scores may improve prediction of outcome and hospital cost. Due to the heterogeneity of morbidity events, future score systems may have to generate separate predictions for mortality and major morbidity events.</description><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Cardiac surgery</subject><subject>Cardiac Surgical Procedures - methods</subject><subject>Cardiac Surgical Procedures - mortality</subject><subject>Cardiopulmonary Bypass - methods</subject><subject>Cardiopulmonary Bypass - mortality</subject><subject>Evaluation Studies as Topic</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Germany</subject><subject>Heart Diseases - diagnosis</subject><subject>Heart Diseases - mortality</subject><subject>Heart Diseases - surgery</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Medical sciences</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Morbidity</subject><subject>Mortality</subject><subject>Odds Ratio</subject><subject>Predictive Value of Tests</subject><subject>Probability</subject><subject>Risk Assessment</subject><subject>Risk factor</subject><subject>Risk Factors</subject><subject>Risk score</subject><subject>ROC Curve</subject><subject>Sensitivity and Specificity</subject><subject>Severity of Illness Index</subject><subject>Surgery (general aspects). Transplantations, organ and tissue grafts. Graft diseases</subject><subject>Surgery of the heart</subject><subject>Survival Analysis</subject><subject>Survival Rate</subject><issn>1010-7940</issn><issn>1873-734X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2000</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNptkF2L1DAUhoMozjj6E1Z6IeJeRE-apKf1TpbdHXEZwQ9YvAmZNNXsTKdjTgs7_97UjqsLQsgHed7zwsPYiYDXAkTx5nPagWOl4BXAKYAsNccHbC5KlBylun6Y7n-QGXtCdAMAhczxMZsJQJS6yOfs_FOgTUZ9tH1ogkt7t8vCLvvhbewzGuJ3Hw9vM9e1exsDpc-uySjcZuS66DM6UO9besoeNXZL_tnxXLCvF-dfzpb86uPl-7N3V9xphT3XVum1Rw8gvIcKyjo9ZC6dqgtQjdTeal9LrCsNMs8tWr0unaiUytEVKOWCvZzm7mP3c_DUmzaQ89ut3fluIIMCVAlllUA9gS52RNE3Zh9Da-PBCDCjP_PbnxnlGBhX8mcw5Z4fC4Z16-t_UpOwBLw4Apac3TbR7lygv5zUKFEnDCasG_b_r-b3qvlYzadISEpv70I2bkwxzjTL62_mQokPqwIqs5K_AAchlFQ</recordid><startdate>20000401</startdate><enddate>20000401</enddate><creator>Geissler, Hans J.</creator><creator>Hölzl, Philipp</creator><creator>Marohl, Sascha</creator><creator>Kuhn-Régnier, Ferdinand</creator><creator>Mehlhorn, Uwe</creator><creator>Südkamp, Michael</creator><creator>de Vivie, E. Rainer</creator><general>Elsevier Science B.V</general><general>Elsevier Science</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>IQODW</scope><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></search><sort><creationdate>20000401</creationdate><title>Risk stratification in heart surgery: comparison of six score systems</title><author>Geissler, Hans J. ; Hölzl, Philipp ; Marohl, Sascha ; Kuhn-Régnier, Ferdinand ; Mehlhorn, Uwe ; Südkamp, Michael ; de Vivie, E. Rainer</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c547t-5a45be7e001ee0908de7e323c4d604f35ea5ed37d950322a7a5b8c194427c6733</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2000</creationdate><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Cardiac surgery</topic><topic>Cardiac Surgical Procedures - methods</topic><topic>Cardiac Surgical Procedures - mortality</topic><topic>Cardiopulmonary Bypass - methods</topic><topic>Cardiopulmonary Bypass - mortality</topic><topic>Evaluation Studies as Topic</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Germany</topic><topic>Heart Diseases - diagnosis</topic><topic>Heart Diseases - mortality</topic><topic>Heart Diseases - surgery</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Medical sciences</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Morbidity</topic><topic>Mortality</topic><topic>Odds Ratio</topic><topic>Predictive Value of Tests</topic><topic>Probability</topic><topic>Risk Assessment</topic><topic>Risk factor</topic><topic>Risk Factors</topic><topic>Risk score</topic><topic>ROC Curve</topic><topic>Sensitivity and Specificity</topic><topic>Severity of Illness Index</topic><topic>Surgery (general aspects). Transplantations, organ and tissue grafts. Graft diseases</topic><topic>Surgery of the heart</topic><topic>Survival Analysis</topic><topic>Survival Rate</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Geissler, Hans J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hölzl, Philipp</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Marohl, Sascha</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kuhn-Régnier, Ferdinand</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mehlhorn, Uwe</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Südkamp, Michael</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>de Vivie, E. Rainer</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><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>European journal of cardio-thoracic surgery</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Geissler, Hans J.</au><au>Hölzl, Philipp</au><au>Marohl, Sascha</au><au>Kuhn-Régnier, Ferdinand</au><au>Mehlhorn, Uwe</au><au>Südkamp, Michael</au><au>de Vivie, E. Rainer</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Risk stratification in heart surgery: comparison of six score systems</atitle><jtitle>European journal of cardio-thoracic surgery</jtitle><stitle>Eur J Cardiothorac Surg</stitle><addtitle>Eur J Cardiothorac Surg</addtitle><date>2000-04-01</date><risdate>2000</risdate><volume>17</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>400</spage><epage>406</epage><pages>400-406</pages><issn>1010-7940</issn><eissn>1873-734X</eissn><coden>EJCSE7</coden><abstract>Objective: Risk scores have become an important tool in patient assessment, as age, severity of heart disease, and comorbidity in patients undergoing heart surgery have considerably increased. Various risk scores have been developed to predict mortality after heart surgery. However, there are significant differences between scores with regard to score design and the initial patient population on which score development was based. It was the purpose of our study to compare six commonly used risk scores with regard to their validity in our patient population. Methods: Between September 1, 1998 and February 28, 1999, all adult patients undergoing heart surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass in our institution were preoperatively scored using the initial Parsonnet, Cleveland Clinic, French, Euro, Pons, and Ontario Province Risk (OPR) scores. Postoperatively, we registered 30-day mortality, use of mechanical assist devices, renal failure requiring hemodialysis or hemofiltration, stroke, myocardial infarction, and duration of ventilation and intensive care stay. Score validity was assessed by calculating the area under the ROC curve. Odds ratios were calculated to investigate the predictive relevance of risk factors. Results: Follow-up was able to be completed in 504 prospectively scored patients. Receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curve analysis for mortality showed the best predictive value for the Euro score. Predictive values for morbidity were considerably lower than predictive values for mortality in all of the investigated score systems. For most risk factors, odds ratios for mortality were substantially different from ratios for morbidity. Conclusions: Among the investigated scores, the Euro score yielded the highest predictive value in our patient population. For most risk factors, predictive values for morbidity were substantially different from predictive values for mortality. Therefore, development of specific morbidity risk scores may improve prediction of outcome and hospital cost. Due to the heterogeneity of morbidity events, future score systems may have to generate separate predictions for mortality and major morbidity events.</abstract><cop>Amsterdam</cop><pub>Elsevier Science B.V</pub><pmid>10773562</pmid><doi>10.1016/S1010-7940(00)00385-7</doi><tpages>7</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1010-7940 |
ispartof | European journal of cardio-thoracic surgery, 2000-04, Vol.17 (4), p.400-406 |
issn | 1010-7940 1873-734X |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_71048089 |
source | Oxford University Press Journals All Titles (1996-Current); MEDLINE; Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals |
subjects | Adult Aged Biological and medical sciences Cardiac surgery Cardiac Surgical Procedures - methods Cardiac Surgical Procedures - mortality Cardiopulmonary Bypass - methods Cardiopulmonary Bypass - mortality Evaluation Studies as Topic Female Germany Heart Diseases - diagnosis Heart Diseases - mortality Heart Diseases - surgery Humans Male Medical sciences Middle Aged Morbidity Mortality Odds Ratio Predictive Value of Tests Probability Risk Assessment Risk factor Risk Factors Risk score ROC Curve Sensitivity and Specificity Severity of Illness Index Surgery (general aspects). Transplantations, organ and tissue grafts. Graft diseases Surgery of the heart Survival Analysis Survival Rate |
title | Risk stratification in heart surgery: comparison of six score systems |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-05T13%3A11%3A27IST&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=Risk%20stratification%20in%20heart%20surgery:%20comparison%20of%20six%20score%20systems&rft.jtitle=European%20journal%20of%20cardio-thoracic%20surgery&rft.au=Geissler,%20Hans%20J.&rft.date=2000-04-01&rft.volume=17&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=400&rft.epage=406&rft.pages=400-406&rft.issn=1010-7940&rft.eissn=1873-734X&rft.coden=EJCSE7&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/S1010-7940(00)00385-7&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E71048089%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=71048089&rft_id=info:pmid/10773562&rft_oup_id=10.1016/S1010-7940(00)00385-7&rfr_iscdi=true |