• Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg · May 2012

    Comparative Study

    Accuracy of two scoring systems for risk stratification in thoracic surgery.

    • Anupama Barua, Sumana D Handagala, Laura Socci, Biplab Barua, Munib Malik, Natalie Johnstone, and Antonio E Martin-Ucar.
    • Department of Thoracic Surgery, Nottingham University Hospital NHS Trust, Nottingham, UK.
    • Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg. 2012 May 1; 14 (5): 556-9.

    AbstractWe investigate the suitability of the two existing risk stratification systems available for predicting mortality in a cohort of patients undergoing lung resection under a single surgeon. Data from the 290 consecutive patients who underwent pulmonary resection between January 2008 and January 2011 were extracted from a prospective clinical data base. In-hospital mortality risk scores are calculated for every patient by using Thoracoscore and ESOS.01 and were compared with actual in-hospital mortality. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was used to establish how well the systems rank for predicting patient mortality. Actual in-hospital mortality was 3.1% (n = 9). Thoracoscore and ESOS values (mean ± SEM) were 4.93 ± 0.32 and 4.08 ± 0.41, respectively. The area under the ROC curve values for ESOS and Thoracoscore were 0.8 and 0.6, respectively. ESOS was reasonably accurate at predicting the overall mortality (sensitivity 88% and specificity 67%), whereas Thoracoscore was a weaker predictor of mortality (sensitivity 67% and specificity 53%). The ESOS score had better predictive values in our patient population and might be easier to calculate. Because of their low specificity, the use of these scores should be limited to the assessment of outcomes of surgical cohorts, but they are not designed to predict risks for individual patients.

      Pubmed     Free 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…

What will the 'Medical Journal of You' look like?

Start your free 21 day trial now.

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.