Cargando…

Comparison of Risk Models in the Prediction of 30-Day Mortality in Acute Myocardial Infarction–Associated Cardiogenic Shock

BACKGROUND: There are numerous risk-prediction models applied to acute myocardial infarction–related cardiogenic shock (AMI-CS) patients to determine a more accurate prognosis and to assist in patient triage. There is wide heterogeneity among the risk models including the nature of predictors evalua...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ranard, Lauren S., Guber, Kenneth, Fried, Justin, Takeda, Koji, Kaku, Yuji, Karmpaliotis, Dimitrios, Sayer, Gabriel, Rabbani, Leroy, Burkhoff, Daniel, Uriel, Nir, Kirtane, Ajay J., Masoumi, Amirali
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10242577/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37288128
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.shj.2022.100116
_version_ 1785054244404985856
author Ranard, Lauren S.
Guber, Kenneth
Fried, Justin
Takeda, Koji
Kaku, Yuji
Karmpaliotis, Dimitrios
Sayer, Gabriel
Rabbani, Leroy
Burkhoff, Daniel
Uriel, Nir
Kirtane, Ajay J.
Masoumi, Amirali
author_facet Ranard, Lauren S.
Guber, Kenneth
Fried, Justin
Takeda, Koji
Kaku, Yuji
Karmpaliotis, Dimitrios
Sayer, Gabriel
Rabbani, Leroy
Burkhoff, Daniel
Uriel, Nir
Kirtane, Ajay J.
Masoumi, Amirali
author_sort Ranard, Lauren S.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: There are numerous risk-prediction models applied to acute myocardial infarction–related cardiogenic shock (AMI-CS) patients to determine a more accurate prognosis and to assist in patient triage. There is wide heterogeneity among the risk models including the nature of predictors evaluated and their specific outcome measures. The aim of this analysis was to evaluate the performance of 20 risk-prediction models in AMI-CS patients. METHODS: Patients included in our analysis were admitted to a tertiary care cardiac intensive care unit with AMI-CS. Twenty risk-prediction models were computed utilizing vitals assessments, laboratory investigations, hemodynamic markers, and vasopressor, inotropic and mechanical circulatory support available from within the first 24 ​hours of presentation. Receiver operating characteristic curves were used to assess the prediction of 30-day mortality. Calibration was assessed with a Hosmer-Lemeshow test. RESULTS: Seventy patients (median age 63 years, 67% male) were admitted between 2017 and 2021. The models' area under the curve (AUC) ranged from 0.49 to 0.79, with the Simplified Acute Physiology Score II score having the most optimal discrimination of 30-day mortality (AUC: 0.79, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.67-0.90), followed by the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation-III score (AUC: 0.72, 95% CI: 0.59-0.84) and the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation-II score (AUC: 0.67, 95% CI: 0.55-0.80). All 20 risk scores demonstrated adequate calibration (p > 0.05 for all). CONCLUSIONS: Among the models tested in a data set of patients admitted with AMI-CS, the Simplified Acute Physiology Score II risk score model demonstrated the highest prognostic accuracy. Further investigations are required to improve the discriminative capabilities of these models or to establish new, more streamlined and accurate methods for mortality prognostication in AMI-CS.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10242577
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Elsevier
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-102425772023-06-07 Comparison of Risk Models in the Prediction of 30-Day Mortality in Acute Myocardial Infarction–Associated Cardiogenic Shock Ranard, Lauren S. Guber, Kenneth Fried, Justin Takeda, Koji Kaku, Yuji Karmpaliotis, Dimitrios Sayer, Gabriel Rabbani, Leroy Burkhoff, Daniel Uriel, Nir Kirtane, Ajay J. Masoumi, Amirali Struct Heart Original Research BACKGROUND: There are numerous risk-prediction models applied to acute myocardial infarction–related cardiogenic shock (AMI-CS) patients to determine a more accurate prognosis and to assist in patient triage. There is wide heterogeneity among the risk models including the nature of predictors evaluated and their specific outcome measures. The aim of this analysis was to evaluate the performance of 20 risk-prediction models in AMI-CS patients. METHODS: Patients included in our analysis were admitted to a tertiary care cardiac intensive care unit with AMI-CS. Twenty risk-prediction models were computed utilizing vitals assessments, laboratory investigations, hemodynamic markers, and vasopressor, inotropic and mechanical circulatory support available from within the first 24 ​hours of presentation. Receiver operating characteristic curves were used to assess the prediction of 30-day mortality. Calibration was assessed with a Hosmer-Lemeshow test. RESULTS: Seventy patients (median age 63 years, 67% male) were admitted between 2017 and 2021. The models' area under the curve (AUC) ranged from 0.49 to 0.79, with the Simplified Acute Physiology Score II score having the most optimal discrimination of 30-day mortality (AUC: 0.79, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.67-0.90), followed by the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation-III score (AUC: 0.72, 95% CI: 0.59-0.84) and the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation-II score (AUC: 0.67, 95% CI: 0.55-0.80). All 20 risk scores demonstrated adequate calibration (p > 0.05 for all). CONCLUSIONS: Among the models tested in a data set of patients admitted with AMI-CS, the Simplified Acute Physiology Score II risk score model demonstrated the highest prognostic accuracy. Further investigations are required to improve the discriminative capabilities of these models or to establish new, more streamlined and accurate methods for mortality prognostication in AMI-CS. Elsevier 2022-10-31 /pmc/articles/PMC10242577/ /pubmed/37288128 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.shj.2022.100116 Text en © 2022 The Author(s) https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
spellingShingle Original Research
Ranard, Lauren S.
Guber, Kenneth
Fried, Justin
Takeda, Koji
Kaku, Yuji
Karmpaliotis, Dimitrios
Sayer, Gabriel
Rabbani, Leroy
Burkhoff, Daniel
Uriel, Nir
Kirtane, Ajay J.
Masoumi, Amirali
Comparison of Risk Models in the Prediction of 30-Day Mortality in Acute Myocardial Infarction–Associated Cardiogenic Shock
title Comparison of Risk Models in the Prediction of 30-Day Mortality in Acute Myocardial Infarction–Associated Cardiogenic Shock
title_full Comparison of Risk Models in the Prediction of 30-Day Mortality in Acute Myocardial Infarction–Associated Cardiogenic Shock
title_fullStr Comparison of Risk Models in the Prediction of 30-Day Mortality in Acute Myocardial Infarction–Associated Cardiogenic Shock
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of Risk Models in the Prediction of 30-Day Mortality in Acute Myocardial Infarction–Associated Cardiogenic Shock
title_short Comparison of Risk Models in the Prediction of 30-Day Mortality in Acute Myocardial Infarction–Associated Cardiogenic Shock
title_sort comparison of risk models in the prediction of 30-day mortality in acute myocardial infarction–associated cardiogenic shock
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10242577/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37288128
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.shj.2022.100116
work_keys_str_mv AT ranardlaurens comparisonofriskmodelsinthepredictionof30daymortalityinacutemyocardialinfarctionassociatedcardiogenicshock
AT guberkenneth comparisonofriskmodelsinthepredictionof30daymortalityinacutemyocardialinfarctionassociatedcardiogenicshock
AT friedjustin comparisonofriskmodelsinthepredictionof30daymortalityinacutemyocardialinfarctionassociatedcardiogenicshock
AT takedakoji comparisonofriskmodelsinthepredictionof30daymortalityinacutemyocardialinfarctionassociatedcardiogenicshock
AT kakuyuji comparisonofriskmodelsinthepredictionof30daymortalityinacutemyocardialinfarctionassociatedcardiogenicshock
AT karmpaliotisdimitrios comparisonofriskmodelsinthepredictionof30daymortalityinacutemyocardialinfarctionassociatedcardiogenicshock
AT sayergabriel comparisonofriskmodelsinthepredictionof30daymortalityinacutemyocardialinfarctionassociatedcardiogenicshock
AT rabbanileroy comparisonofriskmodelsinthepredictionof30daymortalityinacutemyocardialinfarctionassociatedcardiogenicshock
AT burkhoffdaniel comparisonofriskmodelsinthepredictionof30daymortalityinacutemyocardialinfarctionassociatedcardiogenicshock
AT urielnir comparisonofriskmodelsinthepredictionof30daymortalityinacutemyocardialinfarctionassociatedcardiogenicshock
AT kirtaneajayj comparisonofriskmodelsinthepredictionof30daymortalityinacutemyocardialinfarctionassociatedcardiogenicshock
AT masoumiamirali comparisonofriskmodelsinthepredictionof30daymortalityinacutemyocardialinfarctionassociatedcardiogenicshock