Swetha Parvataneni, Michelle Haugh, Yara Sarkis, Brittany Baker, Lauren D Nephew, Marwan S Ghabril, Raj Vuppalanchi, Eric S Orman, Naga P Chalasani, Archita P Desai, Nicholas Eric Harrison
{"title":"预测肝硬化急诊科患者死亡率的临床决策工具","authors":"Swetha Parvataneni, Michelle Haugh, Yara Sarkis, Brittany Baker, Lauren D Nephew, Marwan S Ghabril, Raj Vuppalanchi, Eric S Orman, Naga P Chalasani, Archita P Desai, Nicholas Eric Harrison","doi":"10.1111/acem.15088","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Clinical decision instruments (CDIs) could be useful to aid risk stratification and disposition of emergency department (ED) patients with cirrhosis. Our primary objective was to derive and internally validate a novel Cirrhosis Risk Instrument for Stratifying Post-Emergency department mortality (CRISPE) for the outcomes of 14- and 30-day post-ED mortality. Secondarily, we externally validated the existing Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) scores for explicit use in ED patients and prediction of the same outcomes.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A cohort of 2093 adults with cirrhosis, at 16 sites in a statewide health system, was analyzed for 119 candidate variables available at ED disposition. LASSO with 10-fold cross-validation was used in variable selection for 14-day (CRISPE-14) and 30-day (CRISPE-30) logistic regression models. Area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) was calculated for each variant of the CRISPE and MELD scores and compared via Delong's test. Predictions were compared to actual ED disposition for predictive value and reclassification statistics.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Median (interquartile range [IQR]) characteristics of the cohort were age 62 (53-70) years and MELD 3.0 13.0 (8.0-20.0). Mortality was 4.3% and 8.5% at 14 and 30 days, respectively. CRISPE-14 and CRISPE-30 outperformed each MELD variant, achieving AUROC of 0.824 (95% CI: 0.781-0.866) and 0.829 (0.796-0.861), respectively. MELD 3.0 AUROCs were 0.724 (0.667-0.781) and 0.715 (0.672-0.781), respectively. Compared to ED disposition, CRISPE-14, CRISPE-30, and MELD 3.0 significantly improved positive and negative predictive value and net reclassification index at multiple cutoffs. Applying CRISPE-30 (cutoff 4.5) favorably reclassified one net ED disposition for mortality for every 12 patients, while MELD 3.0 net reclassified one disposition per 84 patients.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>CDIs may be useful in risk-stratifying ED patients with cirrhosis and aiding disposition decision making. The novel CRISPE CDI showed powerful performance and requires external validation, while the existing MELD 3.0 score has moderate performance and is now externally-validated in an ED population for short-term mortality.</p>","PeriodicalId":7105,"journal":{"name":"Academic Emergency Medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Clinical decision instruments for predicting mortality in patients with cirrhosis seeking emergency department care.\",\"authors\":\"Swetha Parvataneni, Michelle Haugh, Yara Sarkis, Brittany Baker, Lauren D Nephew, Marwan S Ghabril, Raj Vuppalanchi, Eric S Orman, Naga P Chalasani, Archita P Desai, Nicholas Eric Harrison\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/acem.15088\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Clinical decision instruments (CDIs) could be useful to aid risk stratification and disposition of emergency department (ED) patients with cirrhosis. Our primary objective was to derive and internally validate a novel Cirrhosis Risk Instrument for Stratifying Post-Emergency department mortality (CRISPE) for the outcomes of 14- and 30-day post-ED mortality. Secondarily, we externally validated the existing Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) scores for explicit use in ED patients and prediction of the same outcomes.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A cohort of 2093 adults with cirrhosis, at 16 sites in a statewide health system, was analyzed for 119 candidate variables available at ED disposition. LASSO with 10-fold cross-validation was used in variable selection for 14-day (CRISPE-14) and 30-day (CRISPE-30) logistic regression models. Area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) was calculated for each variant of the CRISPE and MELD scores and compared via Delong's test. Predictions were compared to actual ED disposition for predictive value and reclassification statistics.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Median (interquartile range [IQR]) characteristics of the cohort were age 62 (53-70) years and MELD 3.0 13.0 (8.0-20.0). Mortality was 4.3% and 8.5% at 14 and 30 days, respectively. CRISPE-14 and CRISPE-30 outperformed each MELD variant, achieving AUROC of 0.824 (95% CI: 0.781-0.866) and 0.829 (0.796-0.861), respectively. MELD 3.0 AUROCs were 0.724 (0.667-0.781) and 0.715 (0.672-0.781), respectively. Compared to ED disposition, CRISPE-14, CRISPE-30, and MELD 3.0 significantly improved positive and negative predictive value and net reclassification index at multiple cutoffs. Applying CRISPE-30 (cutoff 4.5) favorably reclassified one net ED disposition for mortality for every 12 patients, while MELD 3.0 net reclassified one disposition per 84 patients.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>CDIs may be useful in risk-stratifying ED patients with cirrhosis and aiding disposition decision making. The novel CRISPE CDI showed powerful performance and requires external validation, while the existing MELD 3.0 score has moderate performance and is now externally-validated in an ED population for short-term mortality.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7105,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Academic Emergency Medicine\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Academic Emergency Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/acem.15088\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EMERGENCY MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Academic Emergency Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/acem.15088","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EMERGENCY MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
Clinical decision instruments for predicting mortality in patients with cirrhosis seeking emergency department care.
Objective: Clinical decision instruments (CDIs) could be useful to aid risk stratification and disposition of emergency department (ED) patients with cirrhosis. Our primary objective was to derive and internally validate a novel Cirrhosis Risk Instrument for Stratifying Post-Emergency department mortality (CRISPE) for the outcomes of 14- and 30-day post-ED mortality. Secondarily, we externally validated the existing Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) scores for explicit use in ED patients and prediction of the same outcomes.
Methods: A cohort of 2093 adults with cirrhosis, at 16 sites in a statewide health system, was analyzed for 119 candidate variables available at ED disposition. LASSO with 10-fold cross-validation was used in variable selection for 14-day (CRISPE-14) and 30-day (CRISPE-30) logistic regression models. Area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) was calculated for each variant of the CRISPE and MELD scores and compared via Delong's test. Predictions were compared to actual ED disposition for predictive value and reclassification statistics.
Results: Median (interquartile range [IQR]) characteristics of the cohort were age 62 (53-70) years and MELD 3.0 13.0 (8.0-20.0). Mortality was 4.3% and 8.5% at 14 and 30 days, respectively. CRISPE-14 and CRISPE-30 outperformed each MELD variant, achieving AUROC of 0.824 (95% CI: 0.781-0.866) and 0.829 (0.796-0.861), respectively. MELD 3.0 AUROCs were 0.724 (0.667-0.781) and 0.715 (0.672-0.781), respectively. Compared to ED disposition, CRISPE-14, CRISPE-30, and MELD 3.0 significantly improved positive and negative predictive value and net reclassification index at multiple cutoffs. Applying CRISPE-30 (cutoff 4.5) favorably reclassified one net ED disposition for mortality for every 12 patients, while MELD 3.0 net reclassified one disposition per 84 patients.
Conclusions: CDIs may be useful in risk-stratifying ED patients with cirrhosis and aiding disposition decision making. The novel CRISPE CDI showed powerful performance and requires external validation, while the existing MELD 3.0 score has moderate performance and is now externally-validated in an ED population for short-term mortality.
期刊介绍:
Academic Emergency Medicine (AEM) is the official monthly publication of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine (SAEM) and publishes information relevant to the practice, educational advancements, and investigation of emergency medicine. It is the second-largest peer-reviewed scientific journal in the specialty of emergency medicine.
The goal of AEM is to advance the science, education, and clinical practice of emergency medicine, to serve as a voice for the academic emergency medicine community, and to promote SAEM''s goals and objectives. Members and non-members worldwide depend on this journal for translational medicine relevant to emergency medicine, as well as for clinical news, case studies and more.
Each issue contains information relevant to the research, educational advancements, and practice in emergency medicine. Subject matter is diverse, including preclinical studies, clinical topics, health policy, and educational methods. The research of SAEM members contributes significantly to the scientific content and development of the journal.