Cargando…

Comparison of Three Contemporary Risk Scores for Mortality Following Elective Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair

OBJECTIVE/BACKGROUND: A number of contemporary risk prediction models for mortality following elective abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair have been developed. Before a model is used either in clinical practice or to risk-adjust surgical outcome data it is important that its performance is assess...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Grant, S.W., Hickey, G.L., Carlson, E.D., McCollum, C.N.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4082141/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24837173
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejvs.2014.03.040
_version_ 1782324214693363712
author Grant, S.W.
Hickey, G.L.
Carlson, E.D.
McCollum, C.N.
author_facet Grant, S.W.
Hickey, G.L.
Carlson, E.D.
McCollum, C.N.
author_sort Grant, S.W.
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE/BACKGROUND: A number of contemporary risk prediction models for mortality following elective abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair have been developed. Before a model is used either in clinical practice or to risk-adjust surgical outcome data it is important that its performance is assessed in external validation studies. METHODS: The British Aneurysm Repair (BAR) score, Medicare, and Vascular Governance North West (VGNW) models were validated using an independent prospectively collected sample of multicentre clinical audit data. Consecutive, data on 1,124 patients undergoing elective AAA repair at 17 hospitals in the north-west of England and Wales between April 2011 and March 2013 were analysed. The outcome measure was in-hospital mortality. Model calibration (observed to expected ratio with chi-square test, calibration plots, calibration intercept and slope) and discrimination (area under receiver operating characteristic curve [AUC]) were assessed in the overall cohort and procedural subgroups. RESULTS: The mean age of the population was 74.4 years (SD 7.7); 193 (17.2%) patients were women and the majority of patients (759, 67.5%) underwent endovascular aneurysm repair. All three models demonstrated good calibration in the overall cohort and procedural subgroups. Overall discrimination was excellent for the BAR score (AUC 0.83, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.76–0.89), and acceptable for the Medicare and VGNW models, with AUCs of 0.78 (95% CI 0.70–0.86) and 0.75 (95% CI 0.65–0.84) respectively. Only the BAR score demonstrated good discrimination in procedural subgroups. CONCLUSION: All three models demonstrated good calibration and discrimination for the prediction of in-hospital mortality following elective AAA repair and are potentially useful. The BAR score has a number of advantages, which include being developed on the most contemporaneous data, excellent overall discrimination, and good performance in procedural subgroups. Regular model validations and recalibration will be essential.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4082141
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher Elsevier
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-40821412014-07-07 Comparison of Three Contemporary Risk Scores for Mortality Following Elective Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair Grant, S.W. Hickey, G.L. Carlson, E.D. McCollum, C.N. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg Article OBJECTIVE/BACKGROUND: A number of contemporary risk prediction models for mortality following elective abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair have been developed. Before a model is used either in clinical practice or to risk-adjust surgical outcome data it is important that its performance is assessed in external validation studies. METHODS: The British Aneurysm Repair (BAR) score, Medicare, and Vascular Governance North West (VGNW) models were validated using an independent prospectively collected sample of multicentre clinical audit data. Consecutive, data on 1,124 patients undergoing elective AAA repair at 17 hospitals in the north-west of England and Wales between April 2011 and March 2013 were analysed. The outcome measure was in-hospital mortality. Model calibration (observed to expected ratio with chi-square test, calibration plots, calibration intercept and slope) and discrimination (area under receiver operating characteristic curve [AUC]) were assessed in the overall cohort and procedural subgroups. RESULTS: The mean age of the population was 74.4 years (SD 7.7); 193 (17.2%) patients were women and the majority of patients (759, 67.5%) underwent endovascular aneurysm repair. All three models demonstrated good calibration in the overall cohort and procedural subgroups. Overall discrimination was excellent for the BAR score (AUC 0.83, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.76–0.89), and acceptable for the Medicare and VGNW models, with AUCs of 0.78 (95% CI 0.70–0.86) and 0.75 (95% CI 0.65–0.84) respectively. Only the BAR score demonstrated good discrimination in procedural subgroups. CONCLUSION: All three models demonstrated good calibration and discrimination for the prediction of in-hospital mortality following elective AAA repair and are potentially useful. The BAR score has a number of advantages, which include being developed on the most contemporaneous data, excellent overall discrimination, and good performance in procedural subgroups. Regular model validations and recalibration will be essential. Elsevier 2014-07 /pmc/articles/PMC4082141/ /pubmed/24837173 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejvs.2014.03.040 Text en © 2014 European Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) , which allows reusers to copy and distribute the material in any medium or format in unadapted form only, for noncommercial purposes only, and only so long as attribution is given to the creator.
spellingShingle Article
Grant, S.W.
Hickey, G.L.
Carlson, E.D.
McCollum, C.N.
Comparison of Three Contemporary Risk Scores for Mortality Following Elective Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair
title Comparison of Three Contemporary Risk Scores for Mortality Following Elective Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair
title_full Comparison of Three Contemporary Risk Scores for Mortality Following Elective Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair
title_fullStr Comparison of Three Contemporary Risk Scores for Mortality Following Elective Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of Three Contemporary Risk Scores for Mortality Following Elective Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair
title_short Comparison of Three Contemporary Risk Scores for Mortality Following Elective Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair
title_sort comparison of three contemporary risk scores for mortality following elective abdominal aortic aneurysm repair
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4082141/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24837173
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejvs.2014.03.040
work_keys_str_mv AT grantsw comparisonofthreecontemporaryriskscoresformortalityfollowingelectiveabdominalaorticaneurysmrepair
AT hickeygl comparisonofthreecontemporaryriskscoresformortalityfollowingelectiveabdominalaorticaneurysmrepair
AT carlsoned comparisonofthreecontemporaryriskscoresformortalityfollowingelectiveabdominalaorticaneurysmrepair
AT mccollumcn comparisonofthreecontemporaryriskscoresformortalityfollowingelectiveabdominalaorticaneurysmrepair