Cookie Policy Perioperative risk assessment with Euroscore and Euroscore II in patients with coronary artery or valvular disease. - Human insight
Phone: (+39) 0813995453


Perioperative risk assessment with Euroscore and Euroscore II in patients with coronary artery or valvular disease.

Perioperative risk assessment with Euroscore and Euroscore II in patients with coronary artery or valvular disease.

Icon for Wolters Kluwer Related Articles

Perioperative risk assessment with Euroscore and Euroscore II in patients with coronary artery or valvular disease.

Medicine (Baltimore). 2018 Dec;97(50):e13572

Authors: Czub P, Cacko A, Gawałko M, Tataj E, Poliński J, Pawlik K, Cichoń R, Hendzel P

Abstract
Nowadays, both the European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation (EuroSCORE) logistic (ESL) and EuroSCORE II (ESII) models are used worldwide in predicting in-hospital mortality after cardiac operation. However, these scales are based on different populations and represent different medical approaches. The aim of the study was to assess the effectiveness of the ESL and the ESII risk scores in predicting in-hospital death and prolonged hospitalization in intensive care unit (ICU) after coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), aortic valve replacement (AVR), and mitral valve replacement (MVR) by comparison of an estimated risk and a real-life observation at a reference cardiac surgery unit.This retrospective study was based on medical records of patients who underwent a CABG, AVR, or MVR at a reference cardiac surgery unit in a 2-year period. Primary endpoint was defined as in-hospital death. Secondary endpoint was a prolonged hospitalization at the ICU, defined as longer than 3 days.The study encompassed 586 patients [114 (23.1%) female, mean age 65.8 ± 10.5 years], including 493 patients undergoing CABG, 66 patients undergoing AVR, and 27 patients undergoing MVR. The ESL and ESII risk scores were higher in MVR subgroup (31.7% ± 30.5% and 15.3% ± 19.4%) and AVR subgroup (9.7% ± 11.6% and 3.2% ± 4.2%) than in CABG subgroup (6.9% ± 10.4% and 2.5% ± 4.1%; P < .001). Subgroups of patients were significantly different in terms of clinical, biochemical, and echocardiography factors. Primary endpoint occurred in 36 (6.1%) patients: 21 (4.3%), 7 (10.6%), and 8 (29.7%) in CABG, AVR, and MVR subgroups, respectively. The ESII underestimated the risk of mortality. Secondary endpoint occurred in 210 (35.8%) patients: 172 (34.9%), 22 (33.4%), and 16 (59.3%) in CABG, AVR, and MVR subgroups, respectively.In the study, the perioperative risk estimated with the ESL and the ESII risk scores was compared with a real-life outcome among over 500 patients. Regardless of the type of surgery, result in the ESL was better correlated with the risk of in-hospital death.

PMID: 30558022 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

Powered by WPeMatico

P.IVA 08738511214
Privacy Policy
Cookie Policy
Termini e Condizioni

Sede Legale
Viale Campi Flegrei 55
80124 - Napoli

Sede Operativa
Via G.Porzio 4
Centro Direzionale G1
80143 - Napoli

© Copyright 2022 - Humaninsight Srls - All Rights Reserved
Privacy Policy | Cookie Policy | Termini e Condizioni
envelopephone-handsetmap-marker linkedin facebook pinterest youtube rss twitter instagram facebook-blank rss-blank linkedin-blank pinterest youtube twitter instagram