Literature DB >> 17287128

A multi-centre additive and logistic risk model for in-hospital mortality following aortic valve replacement.

Manoj Kuduvalli1, Antony D Grayson, John Au, Geir Grotte, Ben Bridgewater, Brian M Fabri.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To develop a multivariate prediction model for in-hospital mortality following aortic valve replacement.
METHODS: Retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data on 4550 consecutive patients undergoing aortic valve replacement between 1 April 1997 and 31 March 2004 at four hospitals. A multivariate logistic regression analysis was undertaken, using the forward stepwise technique, to identify independent risk factors for in-hospital mortality. The area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was calculated to assess the performance of the model. The statistical model was internally validated using the technique of bootstrap resampling, which involved creating 100 random samples, with replacement, of 70% of the entire dataset. The model was also validated on 816 consecutive patients undergoing aortic valve replacement between 1 April 2004 and 31 March 2005 from the same four hospitals.
RESULTS: Two hundred and seven (4.6%) in-hospital deaths occurred. Independent variables identified with in-hospital mortality are shown with relevant co-efficient values and p-values as follows: (1) age 70-75 years: 0.7046, p<0.001; (2) age 75-85 years: 1.1714, p<0.001; (3) age>85 years: 2.0339, p<0.001; (4) renal dysfunction: 1.2307, p<0.001; (5) New York Heart Association class IV: 0.5782, p=0.003; (6) hypertension: 0.4203, p=0.006; (7) atrial fibrillation: 0.604, p=0.002; (8) ejection fraction<30%: 0.571, p=0.012; (9) previous cardiac surgery: 0.9193, p<0.001; (10) non-elective surgery: 0.5735, p<0.001; (11) cardiogenic shock: 1.1291, p=0.009; (12) concomitant CABG: 0.6436, p<0.001. Intercept: -4.8092. A simplified additive scoring system was also developed. The ROC curve was 0.78, indicating a good discrimination power. Bootstrapping demonstrated that estimates were stable with an average ROC curve of 0.76, with a standard deviation of 0.025. Validation on 2004-2005 data revealed a ROC curve of 0.78 and an expected mortality of 4.7% compared to the observed rate of 4.1%.
CONCLUSIONS: We developed a contemporaneous multivariate prediction model for in-hospital mortality following aortic valve replacement. This tool can be used in day-to-day practice to calculate patient-specific risk by the logistic equation or a simple scoring system with an equivalent predicted risk.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17287128     DOI: 10.1016/j.ejcts.2006.12.035

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Cardiothorac Surg        ISSN: 1010-7940            Impact factor:   4.191


  9 in total

1.  Impact of New York Heart Association classification, advanced age and patient-prosthesis mismatch on outcomes in aortic valve replacement surgery.

Authors:  Alex Zapolanski; Andrew W C Mak; Giovanni Ferrari; Christopher Johnson; Richard E Shaw; Mariano E Brizzio; Jason S Sperling; Juan B Grau
Journal:  Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg       Date:  2012-06-04

2.  Left Atrial Volume and Post-Operative Atrial Fibrillation after Aortic Valve Replacement.

Authors:  Yeruva Madhu Reddy; Ruby Satpathy; Xuedong Shen; Mark Holmberg; Claire Hunter; Aryan Mooss; Dennis Esterbrooks
Journal:  J Atr Fibrillation       Date:  2010-12-15

Review 3.  Risk scores for predicting outcomes in valvular heart disease: how useful?

Authors:  Michael J Mack
Journal:  Curr Cardiol Rep       Date:  2011-04       Impact factor: 2.931

4.  ESC Working Group on Valvular Heart Disease Position Paper: assessing the risk of interventions in patients with valvular heart disease.

Authors:  Raphael Rosenhek; Bernard Iung; Pilar Tornos; Manuel J Antunes; Bernard D Prendergast; Catherine M Otto; Arie Pieter Kappetein; Janina Stepinska; Jens J Kaden; Christoph K Naber; Esmeray Acartürk; Christa Gohlke-Bärwolf
Journal:  Eur Heart J       Date:  2011-03-15       Impact factor: 29.983

Review 5.  Cardiac surgical patients are not the same. But who knows that: the patient, the cardiologist or the surgeon?

Authors:  Haralabos Parissis; Bassel Al-Alao
Journal:  Gen Thorac Cardiovasc Surg       Date:  2013-10-29

Review 6.  Challenges in Diagnosis and Functional Assessment of Coronary Artery Disease in Patients With Severe Aortic Stenosis.

Authors:  Srdjan Aleksandric; Marko Banovic; Branko Beleslin
Journal:  Front Cardiovasc Med       Date:  2022-03-11

7.  Applicability of two international risk scores in cardiac surgery in a reference center in Brazil.

Authors:  Silvia Bueno Garofallo; Daniel Pinheiro Machado; Clarissa Garcia Rodrigues; Odemir Bordim; Renato A K Kalil; Vera Lúcia Portal
Journal:  Arq Bras Cardiol       Date:  2014-05-27       Impact factor: 2.000

Review 8.  Impact of Coronary Artery Disease on 30-Day and 1-Year Mortality in Patients Undergoing Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: A Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Kesavan Sankaramangalam; Kinjal Banerjee; Krishna Kandregula; Divyanshu Mohananey; Akhil Parashar; Brandon M Jones; Yash Jobanputra; Stephanie Mick; Amar Krishnaswamy; Lars G Svensson; Samir R Kapadia
Journal:  J Am Heart Assoc       Date:  2017-10-11       Impact factor: 5.501

9.  Clinical Prediction Models for Valvular Heart Disease.

Authors:  Benjamin S Wessler; Christine M Lundquist; Benjamin Koethe; Jinny G Park; Kristen Brown; Tatum Williamson; Muhammad Ajlan; Zuhair Natto; Jennifer S Lutz; Jessica K Paulus; David M Kent
Journal:  J Am Heart Assoc       Date:  2019-10-04       Impact factor: 5.501

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.