Comparison between the age, creatinine and ejection fraction II score and the European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation II: which score for which patient?

Santarpino, Giuseppe; Nasso, Giuseppe; Peivandi, Armin Darius; Avolio, Maria; Tanzariello, Maria; Giuliano, Lanberto; Saglio, Giuseppe

doi:10.1093/ejcts/ezac049

Cited by 7 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…EuroSCORE II has a strong predictive ability that has recently been confirmed using data collected from our centralized database, and performs better than a parsimonious risk score [17]. In our study, in patients treated with a minimally invasive approach with a sutureless valve, the observed risk was much lower than predicted.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 69%

In-Hospital Mortality and Risk Prediction in Minimally Invasive Sutureless versus Conventional Aortic Valve Replacement

Santarpino

Lorusso

Peivandi

et al. 2022

JCM

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective. Available evidence suggests that a minimally invasive approach with the use of sutureless bioprostheses has a favorable impact on the outcome of patients undergoing aortic valve replacement (AVR). Methods. From 2010 to 2019, 2732 patients underwent conventional AVR through median sternotomy with a stented bioprosthesis (n = 2048) or minimally invasive AVR with a sutureless bioprosthesis (n = 684). Results. Using the propensity score, 206 patients in each group were matched, and the matched groups were well balanced regarding preoperative risk factors. Both unmatched and matched patients of the sutureless + minimally invasive group showed significantly shorter cross-clamp times and longer ICU stay. In-hospital mortality was the only outcome measure that was confirmed in both analyses, and was higher in the stented + conventional group (2.54% and 2.43% in unmatched and matched patients, respectively) compared with the sutureless + minimally invasive group (0.88% and 0.97% in unmatched and matched patients, respectively) (p = 0.0047 and p < 0.0001, respectively). No differences in postoperative pacemaker implantation were recorded in matched patients of both groups (n = 2 [1%] in the stented + conventional group vs. n = 4 [2%] in the sutureless + minimally invasive group; p = 0.41). The discrimination power of EuroSCORE II was not confirmed in the sutureless + minimally invasive group, yielding an area under the ROC curve of 0.568. Conclusions. Minimally invasive sutureless AVR has a favorable impact on the immediate outcome and is associated with significantly lower in-hospital mortality rates compared with conventional AVR, resulting in the absence of the discrimination power of EuroSCORE II for predicting AVR outcomes.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 69%

In-Hospital Mortality and Risk Prediction in Minimally Invasive Sutureless versus Conventional Aortic Valve Replacement

Santarpino

Lorusso

Peivandi

et al. 2022

JCM

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…They determined that the ACEF II score is a userfriendly, simple, cardiac risk score that could be a good alternative to the EuroSCORE II in patients undergoing isolated CABG surgery. [28] In our survey, 2.4% of the analyzed physicians reported using the ACEF II score. In conclusion, our survey study demonstrated that cardiac RSSs are not widely used in clinical practice at a national level for preoperatively assessing the risk of anesthesia in patients undergoing open-heart surgery.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 73%

“…[11] In a meta-analysis, preoperative anemia was associated with adverse outcomes following cardiac surgery. [27] Santarpino et al [28] compared the EuroSCORE II and ACEF II score in terms of 30-day mortality. They determined that the ACEF II score is a userfriendly, simple, cardiac risk score that could be a good alternative to the EuroSCORE II in patients undergoing isolated CABG surgery.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Usage of Cardiac Risk Scores During Anesthetic Assessment Before Cardiovascular Surgery: A Survey Study

Gürel

2024

GKDA Derg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: There are different risk scoring systems (RSSs) for preoperatively determining the risk of cardiovascular surgery. Herein, we aimed to determine which of the current RSSs are used at the national level to assess patients who are planned for cardiovascular surgery. Methods: A survey was conducted electronically or via face-to-face interviews. The number and rate of physicians using RSSs in combination with the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) Physical Status Classification (ASA PSC) were determined. Additionally, the extent to which patients and their relatives were informed about the preoperatively predicted cardiac risk was determined. Results: Of the 139 participating physicians, only 125 were analyzed. The ASA PSC (n=123, 98.4%), EuroSCORE II (n=48, 38.4%), and CARE score (n=23, 18.4%) were the most commonly used scoring systems for determining the risk level. Among the physicians who used the ASA PSC, 67 (53.6%) only used the ASA PSC. The other 56 (44.8%) physicians used one or more RSSs in combination with the ASA PSC. EuroSCORE II (n=48, 38.4%) was commonly used to determine the risk. Only 16 physicians (12.8%) reported using the ASA PSC, EuroSCORE II, and CARE score in combination, (the most frequent triplet combination). Furthermore, 74 physicians (59.2%) informed the patients and their relatives about the preoperative risk. Conclusion:In our study, the ASA PSC was used by almost all the participants. However, current cardiac RSSs were not frequently used in clinical practice at the national level. Thus, we believe that current RSSs should be more widely used to determine the risk level in patients awaiting cardiovascular surgery.

show abstract

“…The results showed that EuroSCORE II was found to be more accurate compared to ACEF II. However, ACEF II was easier and simpler to use in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass sraft surgery compared to the results obtained from EuroSCORE II 40 .A study in Germany demonstrated that STS Score outperforms ACEF II and EuroSCORE II in predicting mortality in patients undergoing Isolated Conventional or Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement surgery 41 . Another study also indicated that EuroSCORE II is superior to ACEF and STS Score in patients undergoing isolated aortic valve surgery 42 .…”

Section: Comparison Between Risk Stratification Modelsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Risk stratification model in predicting mortality among adult cardiac surgery patients and its application in Indonesia: A review

Ali Mustofa,

Yan Efrata Sembiring,

Pandit Bagus Tri Saputra

2023

World J. Adv. Res. Rev.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Risk stratification models have become an important tool for predicting mortality among adult cardiac surgery patients. These models provide clinicians with valuable information to guide decision-making and improve patient outcomes. While various models have been developed and validated globally, their application in the Indonesian context has gained attention. This study aims to examine the use of risk stratification models in predicting mortality among adult cardiac surgery patients in Indonesia. Several validated models, including EuroSCORE II, have shown good calibration and discriminative ability in the Indonesian population. EuroSCORE II, in particular, stands out for its efficient use of variables and the ability to predict mortality across different types of cardiac surgeries. However, it is essential to consider other risk stratification models that offer specific strengths and applications relevant to the Indonesian setting. The implementation of these models can greatly assist clinicians in assessing surgical risks, making informed decisions, and optimizing patient care. To further enhance the application of risk stratification models in Indonesia, additional validation studies specific to the Indonesian population are warranted. Furthermore, the establishment of a comprehensive patient database containing cardiac surgery information in Indonesia would facilitate ongoing research and improve the accuracy of model validation. In conclusion, risk stratification models play a crucial role in predicting mortality among adult cardiac surgery patients. Their application in Indonesia shows promising results, particularly with EuroSCORE II. However, further research, validation, and the development of a comprehensive patient database are needed to maximize the effectiveness and applicability of these models in the Indonesian context.

show abstract

Comparison between the age, creatinine and ejection fraction II score and the European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation II: which score for which patient?

Cited by 7 publications

References 16 publications

In-Hospital Mortality and Risk Prediction in Minimally Invasive Sutureless versus Conventional Aortic Valve Replacement

In-Hospital Mortality and Risk Prediction in Minimally Invasive Sutureless versus Conventional Aortic Valve Replacement

Usage of Cardiac Risk Scores During Anesthetic Assessment Before Cardiovascular Surgery: A Survey Study

Risk stratification model in predicting mortality among adult cardiac surgery patients and its application in Indonesia: A review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About