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...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:European journal of cardio-thoracic surgery 2000-04, Vol.17 (4), p.400-406
Hauptverfasser: Geissler, Hans J., Hölzl, Philipp, Marohl, Sascha, Kuhn-Régnier, Ferdinand, Mehlhorn, Uwe, Südkamp, Michael, de Vivie, E. Rainer
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&amp;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