2013
DOI: 10.1007/s11748-013-0311-8
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Abstract: Regarding operative mortality, EuroSCORE II showed in this study a slightly higher discriminatory accuracy than EuroSCORE I. There were no significant differences in the calibration of the two model versions in "low-" and "moderate-risk" patients regarding early as well as mid-term mortality. Analyses in larger patient populations will contribute to further model improvement.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
13
0
1

Year Published

2014
2014
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 23 publications
(14 citation statements)
references
References 21 publications
0
13
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Figure 3 shows the forest plot of AUC, O/E ratio, and O-E difference for isolated CABG, [7][8][9][10][11][12]17,21,24,26,27 isolated valve surgery, [8][9][10][11]19,24,27,29 and combined CABG and valve procedures. 10,11,18,24,27 Statistical heterogeneity was detected across studies for O/E ratio and O-E difference (P <.01 in each subgroup and overall). The euroSCORE II showed overall good discrimination in isolated CABG (AUC, 0.804; 95% CI, 0.771-0.837) and valve surgery (AUC, 0.777; 95% CI, 0.744-0.811).…”
Section: Meta-regression Analysismentioning
confidence: 95%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Figure 3 shows the forest plot of AUC, O/E ratio, and O-E difference for isolated CABG, [7][8][9][10][11][12]17,21,24,26,27 isolated valve surgery, [8][9][10][11]19,24,27,29 and combined CABG and valve procedures. 10,11,18,24,27 Statistical heterogeneity was detected across studies for O/E ratio and O-E difference (P <.01 in each subgroup and overall). The euroSCORE II showed overall good discrimination in isolated CABG (AUC, 0.804; 95% CI, 0.771-0.837) and valve surgery (AUC, 0.777; 95% CI, 0.744-0.811).…”
Section: Meta-regression Analysismentioning
confidence: 95%
“…When the 9 multicenter studies (112,799 patients) were analyzed, 3,10,14,15,[23][24][25][26][27] the discrimination remained preserved with an AUC of 0.786 (95% CI, 0.760-0.812) without deviation between observed and expected mortality: The O/E ratio was 0.925 (95% CI, 0.797-1.053), and O-E difference was À0.215 (95% CI, À0.602 to 0.172). The analysis of the 13 single-center studies [7][8][9][11][12][13][16][17][18][19][20][21][22] estimated an AUC of 0.801 (95% CI, 0.775-0.827), an O/E ratio of 1.146 (95% CI, 0.915-1.377), and an O-E difference of 0.517 (95% CI, À0.254 to 1.289).…”
Section: Sensitivity Analysismentioning
confidence: 99%
“…At the meeting of the European Association Cardio-Thoracic Surgery in 2011, the conventional EuroSCORE or logistic EuroSCORE was updated with new tools corresponding to the category of ''poor activity''. The accuracy of EuroSCORE II for predicting operative mortality was slightly higher than that of EuroSCORE [6]. Despite the renewal to EuroSCORE II, a significant overestimation of EuroSCORE II was observed in patients with isolated coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) while a slight underestimation of predictions in high-risk patients was revealed by a meta-analysis of 22 studies involving 145,592 cardiac surgery procedures [7].…”
Section: Frailty and Cardiac Surgerymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The ROCs for mid-term mortality were 0.745, 0.739, and 0.718 for additive, ‘logistic EuroSCORE’ and EuroSCORE II, respectively. Furthermore in “high-risk” patients (EuroSCORE >13), EuroSCORE II underestimated early and mid-term outcomes [ 24 ].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%