Predicting operative risk for coronary artery surgery in the United Kingdom: a comparison of various risk prediction algorithms

Objective To compare the ability of four risk models to predict operative mortality after coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG) in the United Kingdom. Design Prospective study. Setting Two cardiothoracic centres in the United Kingdom. Subjects 1774 patients having CABG. Main outcome measures Risk factors were recorded for all patients, along with in-hospital mortality. Predicted mortality was derived from the American Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) risk program, Ontario Province risk score (PACCN), Parsonnet score, and the UK Society of Cardiothoracic Surgeons risk algorithm. Results There were significant differences (p < 0.05) between the British and American populations from which the STS risk algorithm was derived with respect to most variables. The observed mortality in the British population was 3.7% (65 of 1774). The mean pre- dicted mortality by STS score, PACCN, Parsonnet score, and UK algorithms were 1.1%, 1.6%, 4.6%, and 4.7% respectively. The overall predictive ability of the models as measured by the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve were 0.64, 0.60, 0.73, and 0.75, respectively. Conclusions There are differences between the British and American populations for CABG and the North American algorithms are not useful for predicting mortality in the United Kingdom. The UK Society of Cardiothoracic Surgeons algorithm is the best of the models tested but still only has limited predictive ability. Great care must be exercised when using methods of this type for comparisons of units and surgeons.

[1]  R. E. Clark,et al.  Calculating risk and outcome: The Society of Thoracic Surgeons database. , 1996, The Annals of thoracic surgery.

[2]  A. J. Bryan,et al.  Risks and results of surgery , 1995, British heart journal.

[3]  J. Tu,et al.  Multicenter validation of a risk index for mortality, intensive care unit stay, and overall hospital length of stay after cardiac surgery. Steering Committee of the Provincial Adult Cardiac Care Network of Ontario. , 1995, Circulation.

[4]  G. Marshall,et al.  The Veterans Affairs Continuous Improvement in Cardiac Surgery Study. , 1994, The Annals of thoracic surgery.

[5]  B. Griffith,et al.  Risk stratification using the Society of Thoracic Surgeons Program. , 1994, The Annals of thoracic surgery.

[6]  A L Shroyer,et al.  Bayesian-logit model for risk assessment in coronary artery bypass grafting. , 1994, The Annals of thoracic surgery.

[7]  F H Edwards,et al.  Coronary artery bypass grafting: the Society of Thoracic Surgeons National Database experience. , 1994, The Annals of thoracic surgery.

[8]  J. Dupuis,et al.  Risk-adjusted mortality to assess quality of care in cardiac surgery , 1993, Canadian journal of anaesthesia = Journal canadien d'anesthesie.

[9]  P. Walton,et al.  Risk stratification for open heart surgery. , 1992, BMJ.

[10]  S. Nashef,et al.  Risk stratification for open heart surgery: trial of the Parsonnet system in a British hospital. , 1992, BMJ.

[11]  J. Wennberg,et al.  Multivariate Prediction of In‐Hospital Mortality Associated With Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery , 1992 .

[12]  A. Bernstein,et al.  A method of uniform stratification of risk for evaluating the results of surgery in acquired adult heart disease. , 1989, Circulation.

[13]  J A Swets,et al.  Measuring the accuracy of diagnostic systems. , 1988, Science.

[14]  Robert H. Brook,et al.  Hospital Inpatient Mortality , 1987 .

[15]  R. Brook,et al.  Hospital inpatient mortality. Is it a predictor of quality? , 1987, The New England journal of medicine.