• J. Cardiothorac. Vasc. Anesth. · Jun 2021

    Meta Analysis

    MAGGIC, STS, and EuroSCORE II Risk Score Comparison After Aortic and Mitral Valve Surgery.

    • David X Zhuo, Kenneth C Bilchick, Kajal P Shah, Nishaki K Mehta, Hunter Mwansa, Kanasa Nkanza-Kabaso, Younghoon Kwon, Khadijah K Breathett, Ebony J Hilton-Buchholz, and Sula Mazimba.
    • University of Virginia Health System, Department of Medicine, Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, Charlottesville, VA. Electronic address: david.x.zhuo@gmail.com.
    • J. Cardiothorac. Vasc. Anesth. 2021 Jun 1; 35 (6): 1806-1812.

    ObjectivesTo compare the Meta-Analysis Global Group in Chronic Heart Failure (MAGGIC) risk score with the established Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) and EuroSCORE II risk prediction models regarding mortality discrimination after aortic and mitral valve surgery.DesignRetrospective cohort study.SettingSingle tertiary academic medical center.ParticipantsA total of 259 patients who underwent open aortic valve replacement or open mitral valve repair/replacement from 2009-2014.InterventionsRetrospective chart review.Measurements And Main ResultsMAGGIC, STS, and EuroSCORE II risk scores for each patient were studied using binary logistic regression and receiver operating characteristic analysis for the primary endpoint of one-year mortality and secondary endpoint of 30-day mortality. One-year mortality C-statistics were similar across risk scores (STS 0.709, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.578-0.841; MAGGIC 0.673, 95% CI 0.547-0.799; EuroSCORE II 0.642, 95% CI 0.521-0.762; p = 0.56 between STS and MAGGIC; p = 0.20 between STS and EuroSCORE II; and p = 0.69 between MAGGIC and EuroSCORE II). Thirty-day mortality C-statistics also were similar between STS (0.797, 95% CI 0.655-0.939; p < 0.0001 v null hypothesis), MAGGIC (0.721, 95% CI 0.581-0.860; p = 0.33 v STS), and EuroSCORE II (0.688, 95% CI 0.557-0.818; p = 0.06 v STS; p = 0.68 v MAGGIC).ConclusionsThe MAGGIC risk score performs similarly to STS and EuroSCORE II risk models in mortality discrimination after aortic and mitral valve surgery, albeit in a small sample size. This finding has important implications in establishing MAGGIC as a viable prognostic model in this population subset, with fewer variables and ease of use representing key advantages over STS and EuroSCORE II.Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…