L Noyez1, P C Kievit, H A van Swieten, M-J de Boer. 1. Department of Cardio-Thoracic Surgery - 677, Heart Center, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Center, PO Box 9101, 6500 HB, Nijmegen, the Netherlands, l.noyez@ctc.umcn.nl.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The EuroSCORE, worldwide used as a model for prediction of mortality after cardiac surgery, has recently been renewed. Since October 2011, the EuroSCORE II calculator is available at the EuroSCORE website and recommended for clinical use. The intention of this paper is to compare the use of the initial EuroSCORE and EuroSCORE II as a risk evaluation tool. METHODS: 100 consecutive patients who underwent combined mitral valve and coronary bypass surgery (MVR + CABG) and 100 consecutive patients undergoing combined aortic valve surgery and coronary bypass surgery (AVR + CABG) at the Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Center before 10 October 2011 were included. For both groups the initial EuroSCORE and the EuroSCORE II model were used for risk calculation and based on the calculated risks, cumulative sum charts (CUSUM) were constructed to evaluate the impact on performance monitoring. RESULTS: For the MVR + CABG group the calculated risk using the initial logistic EuroSCORE was 9.95 ± 8.47 (1.51-45.37) versus 5.08 ± 4.03 (0.67-19.76) for the EuroSCORE II. For the AVR + CABG group 9.50 ± 8.6 (1.51-69.5) versus 4.77 ± 6.6 (0.96-64.24), respectively. For both groups the calculated risk by the EuroSCORE II was statistically lower compared with the initial EuroSCORE (p < 0.001). This lower expected risk has influence on performance monitoring, using risk-adjusted CUSUM analysis. CONCLUSION: The EuroSCORE II, based on a recently updated database, reduces the overestimation of the calculated risk by the initial EuroSCORE. This difference is statistically significant and the EuroSCORE II may also reflect better current surgical performance.
BACKGROUND: The EuroSCORE, worldwide used as a model for prediction of mortality after cardiac surgery, has recently been renewed. Since October 2011, the EuroSCORE II calculator is available at the EuroSCORE website and recommended for clinical use. The intention of this paper is to compare the use of the initial EuroSCORE and EuroSCORE II as a risk evaluation tool. METHODS: 100 consecutive patients who underwent combined mitral valve and coronary bypass surgery (MVR + CABG) and 100 consecutive patients undergoing combined aortic valve surgery and coronary bypass surgery (AVR + CABG) at the Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Center before 10 October 2011 were included. For both groups the initial EuroSCORE and the EuroSCORE II model were used for risk calculation and based on the calculated risks, cumulative sum charts (CUSUM) were constructed to evaluate the impact on performance monitoring. RESULTS: For the MVR + CABG group the calculated risk using the initial logistic EuroSCORE was 9.95 ± 8.47 (1.51-45.37) versus 5.08 ± 4.03 (0.67-19.76) for the EuroSCORE II. For the AVR + CABG group 9.50 ± 8.6 (1.51-69.5) versus 4.77 ± 6.6 (0.96-64.24), respectively. For both groups the calculated risk by the EuroSCORE II was statistically lower compared with the initial EuroSCORE (p < 0.001). This lower expected risk has influence on performance monitoring, using risk-adjusted CUSUM analysis. CONCLUSION: The EuroSCORE II, based on a recently updated database, reduces the overestimation of the calculated risk by the initial EuroSCORE. This difference is statistically significant and the EuroSCORE II may also reflect better current surgical performance.
Authors: Samer A M Nashef; François Roques; Linda D Sharples; Johan Nilsson; Christopher Smith; Antony R Goldstone; Ulf Lockowandt Journal: Eur J Cardiothorac Surg Date: 2012-02-29 Impact factor: 4.191
Authors: L Noyez; P C Kievit; M W A Verkroost; H B van Wetten; A F T M Verhagen; H A van Swieten Journal: Neth Heart J Date: 2010-08 Impact factor: 2.380
Authors: J Baan; Z Y Yong; K T Koch; J P S Henriques; B J Bouma; S G de Hert; J van der Meulen; J G P Tijssen; J J Piek; B A J M de Mol Journal: Neth Heart J Date: 2010-01 Impact factor: 2.380
Authors: Alec Vahanian; Ottavio Alfieri; Nawwar Al-Attar; Manuel Antunes; Jeroen Bax; Bertrand Cormier; Alain Cribier; Peter De Jaegere; Gerard Fournial; Arie Pieter Kappetein; Jan Kovac; Susanne Ludgate; Francesco Maisano; Neil Moat; Friedrich Mohr; Patrick Nataf; Luc Piérard; José Luis Pomar; Joachim Schofer; Pilar Tornos; Murat Tuzcu; Ben van Hout; Ludwig K Von Segesser; Thomas Walther Journal: Eur Heart J Date: 2008-05-12 Impact factor: 29.983
Authors: Alessandro Parolari; Lorenzo L Pesce; Matteo Trezzi; Laura Cavallotti; Samer Kassem; Claudia Loardi; Davide Pacini; Elena Tremoli; Francesco Alamanni Journal: Ann Thorac Surg Date: 2010-03 Impact factor: 4.330
Authors: Meagan E Stabler; Michael E Rezaee; Devin M Parker; Todd A MacKenzie; Andrew R Bohm; Anthony W DiScipio; David J Malenka; Jeremiah R Brown Journal: Biomarkers Date: 2019-01-11 Impact factor: 2.658
Authors: Isaac Newton Guimarães Andrade; Fernando Ribeiro de Moraes Neto; Tamirys Guimarães Andrade Journal: Rev Bras Cir Cardiovasc Date: 2014 Jan-Mar
Authors: F A Kortlandt; C C van 't Klooster; A L M Bakker; M J Swaans; J C Kelder; T L de Kroon; B J W M Rensing; F D Eefting; J A S van der Heyden; M C Post Journal: Neth Heart J Date: 2016-07 Impact factor: 2.380