Daniel Wendt1, Matthias Thielmann2, Philipp Kahlert3, Svea Kastner2, Vivien Price2, Fadi Al-Rashid3, Polykarpos Patsalis3, Raimund Erbel3, Heinz Jakob2. 1. Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, West-German Heart Center Essen, University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany. Electronic address: daniel.wendt@uk-essen.de. 2. Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, West-German Heart Center Essen, University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany. 3. Department of Cardiology, West-German Heart Center Essen, University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There are a number of scoring systems for risk evaluation in cardiac surgery, the most important of which are the European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation (EuroSCORE), The Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) score, the ACEF score (acronym for age, preoperative creatinine, and ejection fraction), and more recently, the new EuroSCORE-II. The aim of our study was to analyze and compare the predictive value of these scores in patients undergoing aortic valve replacement (AVR) or transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). METHODS: A total of 1,512 consecutive patients undergoing either conventional AVR (n = 1,066) or TAVR (transfemoral, n = 291; transapical, n = 155) were enrolled. Logistic and additive EuroSCORE of all patients were 13.3% ± 13.2% and 7.8% ± 3.3%, on average. The mean STS score, ACEF score, and EuroSCORE-II were 5.7% ± 5.0%, 1.5% ± 0.7%, and 4.2% ± 4.9%, respectively. RESULTS: Overall mortality at 30 days was 6.3%. The area under the curve (AUC) was 73.8 for the logistic EuroSCORE and 73.5 for the additive EuroSCORE. The STS score gave an AUC of 70.8. The AUCs for the ACEF and EuroSCORE-II were 63.8 and 71.2, respectively. In the transfemoral TAVR group, AUCs were 59.8 and 59.3 for the logistic and additive EuroSCORE, respectively, 63.2 for the STS score, and 55.9 and 55.4 for the ACEF and EuroSCORE-II, respectively. In the transapical TAVR group, AUCs were 88.0 and 82.8 for the logistic and additive EuroSCORE, respectively, 79.0 for the STS score, and 61.7 and 83.7 for the ACEF and EuroSCORE-II, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, 30-day mortality was best predicted by the STS score. Discrimination threshold predicting mortality was equal between all other risk calculators. Surprisingly, the new EuroSCORE-II was not superior to other models in risk prediction for AVR and TAVR patients.
BACKGROUND: There are a number of scoring systems for risk evaluation in cardiac surgery, the most important of which are the European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation (EuroSCORE), The Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) score, the ACEF score (acronym for age, preoperative creatinine, and ejection fraction), and more recently, the new EuroSCORE-II. The aim of our study was to analyze and compare the predictive value of these scores in patients undergoing aortic valve replacement (AVR) or transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). METHODS: A total of 1,512 consecutive patients undergoing either conventional AVR (n = 1,066) or TAVR (transfemoral, n = 291; transapical, n = 155) were enrolled. Logistic and additive EuroSCORE of all patients were 13.3% ± 13.2% and 7.8% ± 3.3%, on average. The mean STS score, ACEF score, and EuroSCORE-II were 5.7% ± 5.0%, 1.5% ± 0.7%, and 4.2% ± 4.9%, respectively. RESULTS: Overall mortality at 30 days was 6.3%. The area under the curve (AUC) was 73.8 for the logistic EuroSCORE and 73.5 for the additive EuroSCORE. The STS score gave an AUC of 70.8. The AUCs for the ACEF and EuroSCORE-II were 63.8 and 71.2, respectively. In the transfemoral TAVR group, AUCs were 59.8 and 59.3 for the logistic and additive EuroSCORE, respectively, 63.2 for the STS score, and 55.9 and 55.4 for the ACEF and EuroSCORE-II, respectively. In the transapical TAVR group, AUCs were 88.0 and 82.8 for the logistic and additive EuroSCORE, respectively, 79.0 for the STS score, and 61.7 and 83.7 for the ACEF and EuroSCORE-II, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, 30-day mortality was best predicted by the STS score. Discrimination threshold predicting mortality was equal between all other risk calculators. Surprisingly, the new EuroSCORE-II was not superior to other models in risk prediction for AVR and TAVR patients.
Authors: Richard Tanner; Barbara Moran; Ronan Margey; Gavin Blake; Catherine McGorrian; Jacqueline Geraghty; Susan Groarke; Jana Boleckova; John Hurley; Andrew Roy; David Barton; Declan Sugrue; Ivan P Casserly Journal: Ir J Med Sci Date: 2019-06-13 Impact factor: 1.568
Authors: Fiorenzo V Angehrn; Kerstin J Neuschütz; Daniel C Steinemann; Martin Bolli; Lana Fourie; Pauline Becker; Markus von Flüe Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2022-07-19 Impact factor: 3.453
Authors: Giovanni Pulignano; Michele Massimo Gulizia; Samuele Baldasseroni; Francesco Bedogni; Giovanni Cioffi; Ciro Indolfi; Francesco Romeo; Adriano Murrone; Francesco Musumeci; Alessandro Parolari; Leonardo Patanè; Paolo Giuseppe Pino; Annalisa Mongiardo; Carmen Spaccarotella; Roberto Di Bartolomeo; Giuseppe Musumeci Journal: Eur Heart J Suppl Date: 2017-05-02 Impact factor: 1.803
Authors: Sharaf-Eldin Shehada; Yacine Elhmidi; Öznur Öztürk; Markus Kasel; Antonio H Frangieh; Fanar Mourad; Jaroslav Benedik; Jaafar El Bahi; Mohamed El Gabry; Matthias Thielmann; Heinz Jakob; Daniel Wendt Journal: Cardiol Res Pract Date: 2018-04-05 Impact factor: 1.866
Authors: Marco Russo; Guglielmo Saitto; Antonio Lio; Michele Di Mauro; Paolo Berretta; Maurizio Taramasso; Roberto Scrofani; Alessandro Della Corte; Sandro Sponga; Ernesto Greco; Matteo Saccocci; Antonio Calafiore; Giacomo Bianchi; Andrea Biondi; Irene Binaco; Ester Della Ratta; Ugolino Livi; Paul Werner; Carlo De Vincentiis; Federico Ranocchi; Marco Di Eusanio; Alfred Kocher; Carlo Antona; Fabio Miraldi; Giovanni Troise; Marco Solinas; Francesco Maisano; Guenther Laufer; Francesco Musumeci; Martin Andreas Journal: J Card Surg Date: 2022-04-06 Impact factor: 1.778