Predicting adverse cardiac events using DEVI and CARPREG-I score in pregnant with valvular heart disease: External validation study from MPAC registry.

IF 2.5 3区 医学 Q2 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS
Gnanaraj Justin Paul, Steaphen Anne Princy, Surendran Anju, Anish Keepanasseril
{"title":"Predicting adverse cardiac events using DEVI and CARPREG-I score in pregnant with valvular heart disease: External validation study from MPAC registry.","authors":"Gnanaraj Justin Paul, Steaphen Anne Princy, Surendran Anju, Anish Keepanasseril","doi":"10.1016/j.jjcc.2025.03.015","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>While numerous risk assessment tools exist for pregnant women with valvular heart disease (VHD), validation studies assessing their performance in diverse settings are few. Such validation is crucial before applying these tools routinely in clinical practice.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To validate and establish the clinical utility of two risk stratification tools - DEVI (VHD-specific tool) and CARPREG-I in predicting adverse cardiac events in pregnant women with VHD.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This cohort study involved consecutive pregnancies complicated with VHD enrolled in the prospective Medical College Pregnancy and Cardiac (MPAC) registry from July 2016 to December 2019. Individual risk for adverse composite cardiac events was calculated using DEVI and CARPREG-I models. Performance was assessed through discrimination and calibration characteristics. Clinical utility was evaluated with decision curve analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 1029 pregnancies, 609 had VHD. Mitral regurgitation (67.2 %; 409/609) was most common; 11.5 % (70/609) experienced at least one component of the composite outcome. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.747, with 95 % confidence intervals (CI) (0.685-0.809) for DEVI and 0.705 (95%CI 0.646-0.765) for CARPREG-I models. Calibration plots suggested that the DEVI score overestimates risk at higher probabilities, while the CARPREG-I score underestimates risk at most probabilities. Decision curve analysis demonstrated that both models were useful across predicted probability thresholds between 10 % and 60 %.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In this external validation study in pregnant women with VHD, both DEVI and CARPREG-I scores showed good discriminative ability and clinical utility across various probabilities. However, both models need recalibration to improve the agreement between the predicted and observed events.</p>","PeriodicalId":15223,"journal":{"name":"Journal of cardiology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of cardiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jjcc.2025.03.015","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: While numerous risk assessment tools exist for pregnant women with valvular heart disease (VHD), validation studies assessing their performance in diverse settings are few. Such validation is crucial before applying these tools routinely in clinical practice.

Objectives: To validate and establish the clinical utility of two risk stratification tools - DEVI (VHD-specific tool) and CARPREG-I in predicting adverse cardiac events in pregnant women with VHD.

Methods: This cohort study involved consecutive pregnancies complicated with VHD enrolled in the prospective Medical College Pregnancy and Cardiac (MPAC) registry from July 2016 to December 2019. Individual risk for adverse composite cardiac events was calculated using DEVI and CARPREG-I models. Performance was assessed through discrimination and calibration characteristics. Clinical utility was evaluated with decision curve analysis.

Results: Of the 1029 pregnancies, 609 had VHD. Mitral regurgitation (67.2 %; 409/609) was most common; 11.5 % (70/609) experienced at least one component of the composite outcome. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.747, with 95 % confidence intervals (CI) (0.685-0.809) for DEVI and 0.705 (95%CI 0.646-0.765) for CARPREG-I models. Calibration plots suggested that the DEVI score overestimates risk at higher probabilities, while the CARPREG-I score underestimates risk at most probabilities. Decision curve analysis demonstrated that both models were useful across predicted probability thresholds between 10 % and 60 %.

Conclusion: In this external validation study in pregnant women with VHD, both DEVI and CARPREG-I scores showed good discriminative ability and clinical utility across various probabilities. However, both models need recalibration to improve the agreement between the predicted and observed events.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of cardiology
Journal of cardiology CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS-
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
8.00%
发文量
202
审稿时长
29 days
期刊介绍: The official journal of the Japanese College of Cardiology is an international, English language, peer-reviewed journal publishing the latest findings in cardiovascular medicine. Journal of Cardiology (JC) aims to publish the highest-quality material covering original basic and clinical research on all aspects of cardiovascular disease. Topics covered include ischemic heart disease, cardiomyopathy, valvular heart disease, vascular disease, hypertension, arrhythmia, congenital heart disease, pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatment, new diagnostic techniques, and cardiovascular imaging. JC also publishes a selection of review articles, clinical trials, short communications, and important messages and letters to the editor.
×
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