Daniel J Bertges1, Dan Neal2, Andres Schanzer3, Salvatore T Scali2, Philip P Goodney4, Jens Eldrup-Jorgensen5, Jack L Cronenwett4. 1. Division of Vascular Surgery, University of Vermont College of Medicine, Burlington. 2. Division of Vascular Surgery, University of Florida School of Medicine, Gainesville. 3. Division of Vascular Surgery, University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester. 4. Section of Vascular Surgery, Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon. 5. Division of Vascular Surgery, Maine Medical Center, Portland.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to develop and to validate the Vascular Quality Initiative (VQI) Cardiac Risk Index (CRI) for prediction of postoperative myocardial infarction (POMI) after vascular surgery. METHODS: We developed risk models for in-hospital POMI after 88,791 nonemergent operations from the VQI registry, including carotid endarterectomy (CEA; n = 45,340), infrainguinal bypass (INFRA; n = 18,054), suprainguinal bypass (SUPRA; n = 2678), endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR; n = 18,539), and open abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (OAAA repair; n = 4180). Multivariable logistic regression was used to create an all-procedure and four procedure-specific risk calculators based on the derivation cohort from 2012 to 2014 (N = 61,236). Generalizability of the all-procedure model was evaluated by applying it to each procedure subtype. The models were validated using a cohort (N = 27,555) from January 2015 to February 2016. Model discrimination was measured by area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), and performance was validated by bootstrapping 5000 iterations. The VQI CRI calculator was made available on the Internet and as a free smart phone app available through QxCalculate. RESULTS: Overall POMI incidence was 1.6%, with variation by procedure type as follows: CEA, 0.8%; EVAR, 1.0%; INFRA, 2.6%; SUPRA, 3.1%; and OAAA repair, 4.3% (P < .001). Predictors of POMI in the all-procedure model included age, operation type, coronary artery disease, congestive heart failure, diabetes, creatinine concentration >1.8 mg/dL, stress test status, and body mass index (AUC, 0.75; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.73-0.76). The all-procedure model demonstrated only minimally reduced accuracy when it was applied to each procedure, with the following AUCs: CEA, 0.65 (95% CI, 0.59-0.70); INFRA, 0.69 (95% CI, 0.64-0.73); EVAR, 0.72 (95% CI, 0.65-0.80); SUPRA, 0.62 (95% CI, 0.52-0.72); and OAAA, 0.63 (95% CI, 0.56-0.70). Procedure-specific models had unique predictors and showed improved prediction compared with the all-procedure model, with the following AUCs: CEA, 0.69 (95% CI, 0.66-0.72); INFRA, 0.75 (95% CI, 0.73-0.78); EVAR, 0.76 (95% CI, 0.73-0.80); and OAAA, 0.72 (95% CI, 0.69-0.77). Bias-corrected AUC (95% CI) from internal validation for the models was as follows: all procedures, 0.75 (0.73-0.76); CEA, 0.68 (0.65-0.71); INFRA, 0.74 (0.72-0.76); EVAR, 0.73 (0.70-0.78); and OAAA repair, 0.68 (0.65-0.73). CONCLUSIONS: The VQI CRI is a useful and valid clinical decision-making tool to predict POMI after vascular surgery. Procedure-specific models improve accuracy when they include unique risk factors.
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to develop and to validate the Vascular Quality Initiative (VQI) Cardiac Risk Index (CRI) for prediction of postoperative myocardial infarction (POMI) after vascular surgery. METHODS: We developed risk models for in-hospital POMI after 88,791 nonemergent operations from the VQI registry, including carotid endarterectomy (CEA; n = 45,340), infrainguinal bypass (INFRA; n = 18,054), suprainguinal bypass (SUPRA; n = 2678), endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR; n = 18,539), and open abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (OAAA repair; n = 4180). Multivariable logistic regression was used to create an all-procedure and four procedure-specific risk calculators based on the derivation cohort from 2012 to 2014 (N = 61,236). Generalizability of the all-procedure model was evaluated by applying it to each procedure subtype. The models were validated using a cohort (N = 27,555) from January 2015 to February 2016. Model discrimination was measured by area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), and performance was validated by bootstrapping 5000 iterations. The VQI CRI calculator was made available on the Internet and as a free smart phone app available through QxCalculate. RESULTS: Overall POMI incidence was 1.6%, with variation by procedure type as follows: CEA, 0.8%; EVAR, 1.0%; INFRA, 2.6%; SUPRA, 3.1%; and OAAA repair, 4.3% (P < .001). Predictors of POMI in the all-procedure model included age, operation type, coronary artery disease, congestive heart failure, diabetes, creatinine concentration >1.8 mg/dL, stress test status, and body mass index (AUC, 0.75; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.73-0.76). The all-procedure model demonstrated only minimally reduced accuracy when it was applied to each procedure, with the following AUCs: CEA, 0.65 (95% CI, 0.59-0.70); INFRA, 0.69 (95% CI, 0.64-0.73); EVAR, 0.72 (95% CI, 0.65-0.80); SUPRA, 0.62 (95% CI, 0.52-0.72); and OAAA, 0.63 (95% CI, 0.56-0.70). Procedure-specific models had unique predictors and showed improved prediction compared with the all-procedure model, with the following AUCs: CEA, 0.69 (95% CI, 0.66-0.72); INFRA, 0.75 (95% CI, 0.73-0.78); EVAR, 0.76 (95% CI, 0.73-0.80); and OAAA, 0.72 (95% CI, 0.69-0.77). Bias-corrected AUC (95% CI) from internal validation for the models was as follows: all procedures, 0.75 (0.73-0.76); CEA, 0.68 (0.65-0.71); INFRA, 0.74 (0.72-0.76); EVAR, 0.73 (0.70-0.78); and OAAA repair, 0.68 (0.65-0.73). CONCLUSIONS: The VQI CRI is a useful and valid clinical decision-making tool to predict POMI after vascular surgery. Procedure-specific models improve accuracy when they include unique risk factors.
Authors: T H Lee; E R Marcantonio; C M Mangione; E J Thomas; C A Polanczyk; E F Cook; D J Sugarbaker; M C Donaldson; R Poss; K K Ho; L E Ludwig; A Pedan; L Goldman Journal: Circulation Date: 1999-09-07 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Kristian Thygesen; Joseph S Alpert; Allan S Jaffe; Maarten L Simoons; Bernard R Chaitman; Harvey D White; Kristian Thygesen; Joseph S Alpert; Harvey D White; Allan S Jaffe; Hugo A Katus; Fred S Apple; Bertil Lindahl; David A Morrow; Bernard R Chaitman; Peter M Clemmensen; Per Johanson; Hanoch Hod; Richard Underwood; Jeroen J Bax; Jeroen J Bonow; Fausto Pinto; Raymond J Gibbons; Keith A Fox; Dan Atar; L Kristin Newby; Marcello Galvani; Christian W Hamm; Barry F Uretsky; Ph Gabriel Steg; William Wijns; Jean-Pierre Bassand; Phillippe Menasche; Jan Ravkilde; E Magnus Ohman; Elliott M Antman; Lars C Wallentin; Paul W Armstrong; Maarten L Simoons; James L Januzzi; Markku S Nieminen; Mihai Gheorghiade; Gerasimos Filippatos; Russell V Luepker; Stephen P Fortmann; Wayne D Rosamond; Dan Levy; David Wood; Sidney C Smith; Dayi Hu; Jose-Luis Lopez-Sendon; Rose Marie Robertson; Douglas Weaver; Michal Tendera; Alfred A Bove; Alexander N Parkhomenko; Elena J Vasilieva; Shanti Mendis; Jeroen J Bax; Helmut Baumgartner; Claudio Ceconi; Veronica Dean; Christi Deaton; Robert Fagard; Christian Funck-Brentano; David Hasdai; Arno Hoes; Paulus Kirchhof; Juhani Knuuti; Philippe Kolh; Theresa McDonagh; Cyril Moulin; Bogdan A Popescu; Zeljko Reiner; Udo Sechtem; Per Anton Sirnes; Michal Tendera; Adam Torbicki; Alec Vahanian; Stephan Windecker; Joao Morais; Carlos Aguiar; Wael Almahmeed; David O Arnar; Fabio Barili; Kenneth D Bloch; Ann F Bolger; Hans Erik Botker; Biykem Bozkurt; Raffaele Bugiardini; Christopher Cannon; James de Lemos; Franz R Eberli; Edgardo Escobar; Mark Hlatky; Stefan James; Karl B Kern; David J Moliterno; Christian Mueller; Aleksandar N Neskovic; Burkert Mathias Pieske; Steven P Schulman; Robert F Storey; Kathryn A Taubert; Pascal Vranckx; Daniel R Wagner Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2012-09-05 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Daniel J Bertges; Philip P Goodney; Yuanyuan Zhao; Andres Schanzer; Brian W Nolan; Donald S Likosky; Jens Eldrup-Jorgensen; Jack L Cronenwett Journal: J Vasc Surg Date: 2010-06-08 Impact factor: 4.268
Authors: Judith A R van Waes; Hendrik M Nathoe; Jurgen C de Graaff; Hans Kemperman; Gert Jan de Borst; Linda M Peelen; Wilton A van Klei Journal: Circulation Date: 2013-05-10 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: K A Eagle; C M Coley; J B Newell; D C Brewster; R C Darling; H W Strauss; T E Guiney; C A Boucher Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 1989-06-01 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Robert J Beaulieu; Danielle C Sutzko; Jeremy Albright; Erin Jeruzal; Nicholas H Osborne; Peter K Henke Journal: JAMA Surg Date: 2020-02-01 Impact factor: 14.766
Authors: Andrea M Steely; Peter W Callas; Daniel Neal; Salvatore T Scali; Philip P Goodney; Andres Schanzer; Jack L Cronenwett; Daniel J Bertges Journal: Ann Vasc Surg Date: 2016-11-29 Impact factor: 1.466
Authors: Michiel H F Poorthuis; Reinier A R Herings; Kirsten Dansey; Johanna A A Damen; Jacoba P Greving; Marc L Schermerhorn; Gert J de Borst Journal: Stroke Date: 2021-10-12 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Sidney T Le; Vincent X Liu; Patricia Kipnis; Jie Zhang; Peter D Peng; Elizabeth M Cespedes Feliciano Journal: JAMA Surg Date: 2022-05-11 Impact factor: 16.681
Authors: Danielle C Sutzko; Elizabeth A Andraska; Andrea T Obi; Peter K Henke; Nicholas H Osborne Journal: Ann Vasc Surg Date: 2017-09-08 Impact factor: 1.466
Authors: Larry W Kraiss; Ragheed Al-Dulaimi; Jack L Cronenwett; Philip P Goodney; Daniel G Clair; John Jeb Hallett; Robert Rhodes; Joseph L Mills; Angela P Presson; Benjamin S Brooke Journal: J Vasc Surg Date: 2020-04-01 Impact factor: 4.268
Authors: John Axley; Zdenek Novak; Juliet Blakeslee-Carter; Graeme E McFarland; Emily L Spangler; Benjamin J Pearce; Marc A Passman; Mark A Patterson; Danielle C Sutzko; Adam W Beck Journal: Ann Vasc Surg Date: 2020-09-22 Impact factor: 1.466
Authors: Katharine L McGinigle; Nikki L B Freeman; William A Marston; Alik Farber; Michael S Conte; Michael R Kosorok; Corey A Kalbaugh Journal: Front Cardiovasc Med Date: 2021-07-16