Literature DB >> 20031653

Validation of the Mayo clinic risk score for in-hospital mortality after percutaneous coronary interventions using the national cardiovascular data registry.

Mandeep Singh1, Eric D Peterson, Sarah Milford-Beland, John S Rumsfeld, John A Spertus.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: We sought to validate the recently developed Mayo Clinic Risk Score model for in-hospital mortality after percutaneous coronary intervention using an independent data set. The Mayo Clinic Risk Score has 7 simple clinical and noninvasive variables, available before coronary angiography, for prediction of in-hospital mortality. External validation using an independent data set would support broader applicability of the model. METHODS AND
RESULTS: In-hospital mortality after percutaneous coronary intervention on 309 351 patients from the National Cardiovascular Data Registry admitted from January 1, 2004, to March, 30, 2006, was studied. Using the Mayo Clinic Risk Score equation, we assigned predicted probabilities of death to each patient. The area under the receiver-operating characteristics curve was 0.884, indicating excellent discrimination overall as well as among subgroups, including gender, diabetes mellitus, renal failure, low ejection fraction, different age groups, and multivessel disease. Ninety-seven percent of patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention had a Mayo Clinic Risk Score <10, indicating low to intermediate risk. The Mayo Clinic Risk Score model initially slightly underpredicted event rates when applied in National Cardiovascular Data Registry data (observed 1.23% versus predicted 1.10%), but this underprediction was corrected after recalibration. The recalibrated risk score discriminated (c index=0.885) and calibrated well in an National Cardiovascular Data Registry validation data set consisting of procedures performed between April 1, 2006, and March 30, 2007.
CONCLUSIONS: Seven variables can be combined into a convenient risk scoring system before coronary angiography is performed to predict in-hospital mortality after percutaneous coronary intervention. This model may be useful for providing patients with individualized, evidence-based estimates of procedural risk as part of the informed consent process before percutaneous coronary intervention.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 20031653     DOI: 10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.107.755991

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Circ Cardiovasc Interv        ISSN: 1941-7640            Impact factor:   6.546


  5 in total

Review 1.  Which antithrombin for whom? Identifying the patient population that benefits most from novel antithrombin agents.

Authors:  David A Burke; Haider J Warraich; Duane S Pinto
Journal:  Curr Cardiol Rep       Date:  2012-08       Impact factor: 2.931

2.  Coronary angioplasty: do we need to EuroSCORE?

Authors:  Scot Garg; Patrick W Serruys
Journal:  Nat Rev Cardiol       Date:  2009-04       Impact factor: 32.419

3.  Clinical Outcomes of Polytetrafluoroethylene-Covered Stents for Coronary Artery Perforation in Elderly Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Interventions.

Authors:  Huang-Joe Wang; Jen-Jyh Lin; Wan-Yu Lo; Chih-Ping Chang; Chung-Ho Hsu; Li-Chuan Hsieh; Yeh-Peng Chen; Yen-Nien Lin; Kuan-Cheng Chang; Ping-Han Lo
Journal:  Acta Cardiol Sin       Date:  2017-11       Impact factor: 2.672

4.  Vascular complications in patients who underwent endovascular cardiac procedures: multicenter cohort study.

Authors:  Angelita Costanzi Paganin; Mariur Gomes Beghetto; Maria Karolina Feijó; Roselene Matte; Jaquelini Messer Sauer; Eneida Rejane Rabelo-Silva
Journal:  Rev Lat Am Enfermagem       Date:  2018-10-11

5.  Comparison of SYNTAX score strata effects of percutaneous and surgical revascularization trials: A meta-analysis.

Authors:  Mario Gaudino; Irbaz Hameed; Antonino Di Franco; Ajita Naik; Michelle Demetres; Giuseppe Biondi-Zoccai; Sripal Bangalore
Journal:  J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg       Date:  2021-06-02       Impact factor: 5.209

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.