A comparative study of the risk stratification models for pediatric cardiac surgery

IF 0.3 Q4 CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE
Shahzad Alam , Akunuri Shalini , Rajesh G. Hegde , Rufaida Mazahir , Akanksha Jain
{"title":"A comparative study of the risk stratification models for pediatric cardiac surgery","authors":"Shahzad Alam ,&nbsp;Akunuri Shalini ,&nbsp;Rajesh G. Hegde ,&nbsp;Rufaida Mazahir ,&nbsp;Akanksha Jain","doi":"10.1016/j.ejccm.2018.03.001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><p>The objective of the study was to compare Risk Assessment for Congenital Heart Surgery (RACHS-1), Aristotle Basic Complexity (ABC) and Society of Thoracic Surgeons – European Association for Cardiothoracic Surgery (STS-EACTS) complexity scoring models for predicting outcome after surgery for congenital heart disease.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>This retrospective study included children &lt;18 years. Procedures were categorized based on RACHS-1, ABC and STS-EACTS system. Outcome indicators were prolonged length of ICU stay (upper 25th percentile) and hospital mortality. The stratification models were tested for calibration using Hosmer‑Lemeshow modification of chi-square test and for discrimination using Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curve. Area under the curve (AUC) of individual ROC curves was compared using z-statistics.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>The study included 920 patients. All 3 models showed good fit for both prolonged ICU stay and mortality on calibration. STS-EACTS outclassed RACHS-1 and ABC models with AUC of 0.759 for prolonged PLOS and 0.870 for hospital mortality. AUC of ROC curve for STS-EACTS was significantly higher than RACHS-1 model for both prolonged PLOS (p – 0.046) and hospital mortality (p – 0.015). No significant difference was observed between the AUC of ROC curves of other models.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>Risk stratification for pediatric heart surgery is a useful tool to predict the outcome. STS-EACTS risk stratification model has the best discriminative power.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":31233,"journal":{"name":"Egyptian Journal of Critical Care Medicine","volume":"6 1","pages":"Pages 5-8"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2018-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.ejccm.2018.03.001","citationCount":"8","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Egyptian Journal of Critical Care Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2090730318300021","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8

Abstract

Objective

The objective of the study was to compare Risk Assessment for Congenital Heart Surgery (RACHS-1), Aristotle Basic Complexity (ABC) and Society of Thoracic Surgeons – European Association for Cardiothoracic Surgery (STS-EACTS) complexity scoring models for predicting outcome after surgery for congenital heart disease.

Methods

This retrospective study included children <18 years. Procedures were categorized based on RACHS-1, ABC and STS-EACTS system. Outcome indicators were prolonged length of ICU stay (upper 25th percentile) and hospital mortality. The stratification models were tested for calibration using Hosmer‑Lemeshow modification of chi-square test and for discrimination using Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curve. Area under the curve (AUC) of individual ROC curves was compared using z-statistics.

Results

The study included 920 patients. All 3 models showed good fit for both prolonged ICU stay and mortality on calibration. STS-EACTS outclassed RACHS-1 and ABC models with AUC of 0.759 for prolonged PLOS and 0.870 for hospital mortality. AUC of ROC curve for STS-EACTS was significantly higher than RACHS-1 model for both prolonged PLOS (p – 0.046) and hospital mortality (p – 0.015). No significant difference was observed between the AUC of ROC curves of other models.

Conclusion

Risk stratification for pediatric heart surgery is a useful tool to predict the outcome. STS-EACTS risk stratification model has the best discriminative power.

儿童心脏外科风险分层模型的比较研究
本研究的目的是比较先天性心脏手术风险评估(RACHS-1)、亚里士多德基本复杂性(ABC)和胸外科学会-欧洲心胸外科协会(STS-EACTS)复杂性评分模型对先天性心脏病手术后预后的预测。方法回顾性研究对象为18岁 岁儿童。程序按照RACHS-1、ABC和STS-EACTS系统进行分类。结果指标为ICU住院时间延长(上25百分位)和住院死亡率。采用Hosmer - Lemeshow修正卡方检验对分层模型进行校正,采用受试者工作特征(ROC)曲线对分层模型进行判别。各ROC曲线的曲线下面积(AUC)采用z统计量进行比较。结果共纳入920例患者。3种模型对ICU住院时间和死亡率均有较好的拟合。STS-EACTS优于RACHS-1和ABC模型,延长PLOS的AUC为0.759,医院死亡率为0.870。STS-EACTS的ROC曲线AUC在延长PLOS (p - 0.046)和住院死亡率(p - 0.015)上均显著高于RACHS-1模型。其他模型的ROC曲线AUC差异无统计学意义。结论儿童心脏手术风险分层是预测预后的有效工具。STS-EACTS风险分层模型具有最好的判别能力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
5
审稿时长
42 weeks
期刊介绍: The Egyptian Journal of Critical Care Medicine is the official Journal of the Egyptian College of Critical Care Physicians, the most authoritative organization of Egyptian physicians involved in the multi-professional field of critical care medicine. The journal is intended to provide a peer-reviewed source for multidisciplinary coverage of general acute and intensive care medicine and its various subcategories including cardiac, pulmonary, neuro, renal as well as post-operative care. The journal is proud to have an international multi-professional editorial board in the broad field of critical care that will assist in publishing promising research and breakthrough reports that lead to better patients care in life threatening conditions, and bring the reader a quick access to the latest diagnostic and therapeutic approaches in monitoring and management of critically ill patients.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信