BACKGROUND: Benchmarking the performance of providers is an increasing priority in many health care economies. In-hospital mortality represents an important and uniformly assessed measure on which to examine the outcome of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Most existing prediction models of in-hospital mortality after PCI were derived from 1990s data, and their current relevance is uncertain. METHODS: From consecutive PCIs performed during 2000-2008, derivation and validation cohorts of 10,694 and 5,347 patients, respectively, were analyzed. Logistic regression for in-hospital death yielded integer risk weights for each independent predictor variable. These were summed for each patient to create the Toronto PCI risk score. RESULTS: Death occurred in 1.3% of patients. Independent predictors with associated risk weights in parentheses were as follows: age 40 to 49 y (1), 50 to 59 y (2), 60 to 69 y (3), 70 to 79 y (4), and > or =80 y (5); diabetes (2); renal insufficiency (2); New York Heart Association class 4 (3); left ventricular ejection fraction <20% (3); myocardial infarction in the previous month (3); multivessel disease (1); left main disease (2); rescue or facilitated PCI (3); primary PCI (4); and shock (6). The model had a receiver operator curve of 0.96 and Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit P = .16 in the validation set. Four previously published external models were tested in the entire data set. Three models had ROC curves significantly less than the Toronto PCI score, and all 4 showed significant levels of imprecision. CONCLUSIONS: The Toronto PCI mortality score is an accurate and contemporary predictive tool that permits evaluation of risk-stratified outcomes and aids counseling of patients undergoing PCI.
BACKGROUND: Benchmarking the performance of providers is an increasing priority in many health care economies. In-hospital mortality represents an important and uniformly assessed measure on which to examine the outcome of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Most existing prediction models of in-hospital mortality after PCI were derived from 1990s data, and their current relevance is uncertain. METHODS: From consecutive PCIs performed during 2000-2008, derivation and validation cohorts of 10,694 and 5,347 patients, respectively, were analyzed. Logistic regression for in-hospital death yielded integer risk weights for each independent predictor variable. These were summed for each patient to create the Toronto PCI risk score. RESULTS: Death occurred in 1.3% of patients. Independent predictors with associated risk weights in parentheses were as follows: age 40 to 49 y (1), 50 to 59 y (2), 60 to 69 y (3), 70 to 79 y (4), and > or =80 y (5); diabetes (2); renal insufficiency (2); New York Heart Association class 4 (3); left ventricular ejection fraction <20% (3); myocardial infarction in the previous month (3); multivessel disease (1); left main disease (2); rescue or facilitated PCI (3); primary PCI (4); and shock (6). The model had a receiver operator curve of 0.96 and Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit P = .16 in the validation set. Four previously published external models were tested in the entire data set. Three models had ROC curves significantly less than the Toronto PCI score, and all 4 showed significant levels of imprecision. CONCLUSIONS: The Toronto PCI mortality score is an accurate and contemporary predictive tool that permits evaluation of risk-stratified outcomes and aids counseling of patients undergoing PCI.
Authors: William S Weintraub; Maria V Grau-Sepulveda; Jocelyn M Weiss; Elizabeth R Delong; Eric D Peterson; Sean M O'Brien; Paul Kolm; Lloyd W Klein; Richard E Shaw; Charles McKay; Laura L Ritzenthaler; Jeffrey J Popma; John C Messenger; David M Shahian; Frederick L Grover; John E Mayer; Kirk N Garratt; Issam D Moussa; Fred H Edwards; George D Dangas Journal: Circulation Date: 2012-02-23 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Eric D Peterson; David Dai; Elizabeth R DeLong; J Matthew Brennan; Mandeep Singh; Sunil V Rao; Richard E Shaw; Matthew T Roe; Kalon K L Ho; Lloyd W Klein; Ronald J Krone; William S Weintraub; Ralph G Brindis; John S Rumsfeld; John A Spertus Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2010-05-04 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Larry A Allen; Lynne W Stevenson; Kathleen L Grady; Nathan E Goldstein; Daniel D Matlock; Robert M Arnold; Nancy R Cook; G Michael Felker; Gary S Francis; Paul J Hauptman; Edward P Havranek; Harlan M Krumholz; Donna Mancini; Barbara Riegel; John A Spertus Journal: Circulation Date: 2012-03-05 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Connie N Hess; Matthew T Roe; Robert M Clare; Karen Chiswell; Joseph Kelly; James E Tcheng; Emil Hagstrom; Stefan K James; Michel G Khouri; Bradford R Hirsch; David F Kong; Amy P Abernethy; Mitchell W Krucoff Journal: J Am Heart Assoc Date: 2015-07-06 Impact factor: 5.501
Authors: Katherine S L McAllister; Peter F Ludman; William Hulme; Mark A de Belder; Rodney Stables; Saqib Chowdhary; Mamas A Mamas; Matthew Sperrin; Iain E Buchan Journal: Int J Cardiol Date: 2016-02-17 Impact factor: 4.164