OBJECTIVES: The European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation (EuroSCORE) II was developed to improve the overestimation of surgical risk associated with the original (additive and logistic) EuroSCOREs. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the significance of the EuroSCORE II by comparing its performance with that of the original EuroSCOREs in Japanese patients undergoing surgery on the thoracic aorta. METHODS: We have calculated the predicted mortalities according to the additive EuroSCORE, logistic EuroSCORE and EuroSCORE II algorithms in 461 patients who underwent surgery on the thoracic aorta during a period of 20 years (1993-2013). RESULTS: The actual in-hospital mortality rates in the low- (additive EuroSCORE of 3-6), moderate- (7-11) and high-risk (≥11) groups (followed by overall mortality) were 1.3, 6.2 and 14.4% (7.2% overall), respectively. Among the three different risk groups, the expected mortality rates were 5.5 ± 0.6, 9.1 ± 0.7 and 13.5 ± 0.2% (9.5 ± 0.1% overall) by the additive EuroSCORE algorithm, 5.3 ± 0.1, 16 ± 0.4 and 42.4 ± 1.3% (19.9 ± 0.7% overall) by the logistic EuroSCORE algorithm and 1.6 ± 0.1, 5.2 ± 0.2 and 18.5 ± 1.3% (7.4 ± 0.4% overall) by the EuroSCORE II algorithm, indicating poor prediction (P < 0.0001) of the mortality in the high-risk group, especially by the logistic EuroSCORE. The areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves of the additive EuroSCORE, logistic EuroSCORE and EuroSCORE II algorithms were 0.6937, 0.7169 and 0.7697, respectively. Thus, the mortality expected by the EuroSCORE II more closely matched the actual mortality in all three risk groups. In contrast, the mortality expected by the logistic EuroSCORE overestimated the risks in the moderate- (P = 0.0002) and high-risk (P < 0.0001) patient groups. CONCLUSIONS: Although all of the original EuroSCOREs and EuroSCORE II appreciably predicted the surgical mortality for thoracic aortic surgery in Japanese patients, the EuroSCORE II best predicted the mortalities in all risk groups.
OBJECTIVES: The European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation (EuroSCORE) II was developed to improve the overestimation of surgical risk associated with the original (additive and logistic) EuroSCOREs. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the significance of the EuroSCORE II by comparing its performance with that of the original EuroSCOREs in Japanese patients undergoing surgery on the thoracic aorta. METHODS: We have calculated the predicted mortalities according to the additive EuroSCORE, logistic EuroSCORE and EuroSCORE II algorithms in 461 patients who underwent surgery on the thoracic aorta during a period of 20 years (1993-2013). RESULTS: The actual in-hospital mortality rates in the low- (additive EuroSCORE of 3-6), moderate- (7-11) and high-risk (≥11) groups (followed by overall mortality) were 1.3, 6.2 and 14.4% (7.2% overall), respectively. Among the three different risk groups, the expected mortality rates were 5.5 ± 0.6, 9.1 ± 0.7 and 13.5 ± 0.2% (9.5 ± 0.1% overall) by the additive EuroSCORE algorithm, 5.3 ± 0.1, 16 ± 0.4 and 42.4 ± 1.3% (19.9 ± 0.7% overall) by the logistic EuroSCORE algorithm and 1.6 ± 0.1, 5.2 ± 0.2 and 18.5 ± 1.3% (7.4 ± 0.4% overall) by the EuroSCORE II algorithm, indicating poor prediction (P < 0.0001) of the mortality in the high-risk group, especially by the logistic EuroSCORE. The areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves of the additive EuroSCORE, logistic EuroSCORE and EuroSCORE II algorithms were 0.6937, 0.7169 and 0.7697, respectively. Thus, the mortality expected by the EuroSCORE II more closely matched the actual mortality in all three risk groups. In contrast, the mortality expected by the logistic EuroSCORE overestimated the risks in the moderate- (P = 0.0002) and high-risk (P < 0.0001) patient groups. CONCLUSIONS: Although all of the original EuroSCOREs and EuroSCORE II appreciably predicted the surgical mortality for thoracic aortic surgery in Japanese patients, the EuroSCORE II best predicted the mortalities in all risk groups.
Authors: F Roques; S A Nashef; P Michel; E Gauducheau; C de Vincentiis; E Baudet; J Cortina; M David; A Faichney; F Gabrielle; E Gams; A Harjula; M T Jones; P P Pintor; R Salamon; L Thulin Journal: Eur J Cardiothorac Surg Date: 1999-06 Impact factor: 4.191
Authors: Hanna Barmettler; Franz F Immer; Pascal A Berdat; Friedrich S Eckstein; Beat Kipfer; Thierry P Carrel Journal: Eur J Cardiothorac Surg Date: 2004-05 Impact factor: 4.191
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: John Chalmers; Mark Pullan; Brian Fabri; James McShane; Matthew Shaw; Neeraj Mediratta; Michael Poullis Journal: Eur J Cardiothorac Surg Date: 2012-07-24 Impact factor: 4.191
Authors: J F Gummert; A Funkat; B Osswald; A Beckmann; W Schiller; A Krian; F Beyersdorf; A Haverich; J Cremer Journal: Clin Res Cardiol Date: 2009-03-05 Impact factor: 5.460
Authors: Manuel Carnero-Alcázar; Jacobo Alberto Silva Guisasola; Fernando José Reguillo Lacruz; Luis Carlos Maroto Castellanos; Javier Cobiella Carnicer; Enrique Villagrán Medinilla; Teresa Tejerina Sánchez; José Enrique Rodríguez Hernández Journal: Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg Date: 2012-11-23
Authors: Mario Castaño; Javier Gualis; Jose M Martínez-Comendador; Elio Martín; Pasquale Maiorano; Laura Castillo Journal: J Thorac Dis Date: 2017-05 Impact factor: 2.895