DOI 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2005.02.066
Validation and refinement of mortality risk models for heart valve surgery.
Аннотация
BACKGROUND
The Northern New England Cardiovascular Disease Study Group (NNE) recently published risk models for hospital mortality after heart valve surgery. The Providence Health System Cardiovascular Study Group (PHS) has been collecting similar heart valve data for 8 years, providing an ideal opportunity to both validate the NNE risk models and attempt to produce an improved model, by using some different modeling techniques.
METHODS
From 1997 to 2004, 3,324 patients aged 30 to 95 years underwent aortic valve replacement (AVR), and 1,596 underwent mitral valve replacement or repair (MVRR) at one of nine PHS medical centers. We used area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (c-index) to measure model discrimination, and Hosmer-Lemeshow statistic (H-L) to measure calibration. We modified the NNE models by ungrouping continuous variables, seeking optimal transformations of continuous variables, and imputing missing values by multiple regression.
RESULTS
The prevalence and the lethality of risk factors were similar in PHS and NNE patients. The NNE models fit PHS patients well: c-index (95% confidence interval) = 0.75 (0.70 to 0.80) for AVR and 0.81 (0.76 to 0.86) for MVRR; H-L = 3.95 (p = 0.861) for AVR and 7.10 (p = 0.526) for MVRR. A single PHS model performed slightly better for both positions: c-index = 0.79 (0.75 to 0.83) for AVR and 0.84 (0.80 to 0.88) for MVRR; H-L = 2.75 (p = 0.949) for AVR and 12.21 (p = 0.142) for MVRR.
CONCLUSIONS
The NNE models for aortic and mitral valve surgery were successfully validated using PHS patients. Using some different statistical approaches to modeling, we produced a new, unified model for both positions.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.