35
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Predicting the occurrence of major adverse cardiac events within 30 days of a vascular surgery: an empirical comparison of the minimum p value method and ROC curve approach using individual patient data meta-analysis

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          We aimed to compare the minimum p value method and the area under the receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curve approach to categorize continuous biomarkers for the prediction of postoperative 30-day major adverse cardiac events in noncardiac vascular surgery patients. Individual-patient data from six cohorts reporting B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP) or N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NTproBNP) were obtained. These biomarkers were dichotomized using the minimum p value method and compared with previously reported ROC curve-derived thresholds using logistic regression analysis. A final prediction model was developed, internally validated, and assessed for its sensitivity to clustering effects. Finally, a preoperative risk score system was proposed. Thresholds identified by the minimum p value method and ROC curve approach were 115.57 pg/ml (p < 0.001) and 116 pg/ml for BNP, and 241.7 pg/ml (p = 0.001) and 277.5 pg/ml for NTproBNP, respectively. The minimum p value thresholds were slightly stronger predictors based on our logistic regression analysis. The final model included a composite predictor of the minimum p value method’s BNP and NTproBNP thresholds [odds ratio (OR) = 8.5, p < 0.001], surgery type (OR = 2.5, p = 0.002), and diabetes (OR = 2.1, p = 0.015). Preoperative risks using the scoring system ranged from 2 to 49 %. The minimum p value method and ROC curve approach identify similar optimal thresholds. We propose to replace the revised cardiac risk index with our risk score system for individual-specific preoperative risk stratification after noncardiac nonvascular surgery.

          Related collections

          Most cited references25

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Systematic review: prediction of perioperative cardiac complications and mortality by the revised cardiac risk index.

          The Revised Cardiac Risk Index (RCRI) is widely used to predict perioperative cardiac complications. To evaluate the ability of the RCRI to predict cardiac complications and death after noncardiac surgery. MEDLINE, EMBASE, and ISI Web of Science (1966 to 31 December 2008). Cohort studies that reported the association of the RCRI with major cardiac complications (cardiac death, myocardial infarction, and nonfatal cardiac arrest) or death in the hospital or within 30 days of surgery. Two reviewers independently extracted study characteristics, documented outcome data, and evaluated study quality. Of 24 studies (792 740 patients), 18 reported cardiac complications; 6 of the 18 studies were prospective and had uniform outcome surveillance and blinded outcome adjudication. The RCRI discriminated moderately well between patients at low versus high risk for cardiac events after mixed noncardiac surgery (area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve [AUC], 0.75 [95% CI, 0.72 to 0.79]); sensitivity, 0.65 [CI, 0.46 to 0.81]; specificity, 0.76 [CI, 0.58 to 0.88]; positive likelihood ratio, 2.78 [CI, 1.74 to 4.45]; negative likelihood ratio, 0.45 [CI, 0.31 to 0.67]). Prediction of cardiac events after vascular noncardiac surgery was less accurate (AUC, 0.64 [CI, 0.61 to 0.66]; sensitivity, 0.70 [CI, 0.53 to 0.82]; specificity, 0.55 [CI, 0.45 to 0.66]; positive likelihood ratio, 1.56 [CI, 1.42 to 1.73]; negative likelihood ratio, 0.55 [CI, 0.40 to 0.76]). Six studies reported death, with a median AUC of 0.62 (range, 0.54 to 0.78). A pooled AUC for predicting death could not be calculated because of very high heterogeneity (I(2) = 95%). Studies generally were of low methodological quality, had varied definitions of cardiac events, and were statistically and clinically heterogeneous. The RCRI discriminated moderately well between patients at low versus high risk for cardiac events after mixed noncardiac surgery. It did not perform well at predicting cardiac events after vascular noncardiac surgery or at predicting death. High-quality research is needed in this area of perioperative medicine.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Guidelines for pre-operative cardiac risk assessment and perioperative cardiac management in non-cardiac surgery.

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              Maximally Selected Chi Square Statistics

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                thuva.vanni@gmail.com
                rodsethr@ukzn.ac.za
                Giovanna.LuratiBuse@med.uni-duesseldorf.de
                Daniel.Bolliger@usb.ch
                Christoph.Burkhart@ksgr.ch
                brian.cuthbertson@sunnybrook.ca
                simoncgibson@hotmail.com
                elisabeth.mahla@meduni-graz.at
                oleibo@hadassah.org.il
                bruce.biccard@uct.ac.za
                thabanl@mcmaster.ca
                Journal
                Springerplus
                Springerplus
                SpringerPlus
                Springer International Publishing (Cham )
                2193-1801
                9 March 2016
                9 March 2016
                2016
                : 5
                : 304
                Affiliations
                [ ]Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, McMaster University, Health Sciences Centre, Room 2C7, 1280 Main Street West, Hamilton, ON L8S 4K1 Canada
                [ ]Perioperative Research Unit, Department of Anaesthetics, Nelson R. Mandela School of Medicine, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Pietermaritzburg, South Africa
                [ ]Department of Anaesthetics, Grey’s Hospital, Pietermaritzburg, South Africa
                [ ]Department of Anaesthesia, Surgical Intensive Care, Prehospital Emergency Medicine and Pain Therapy, University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland
                [ ]Department of Anaesthesiology, Kantonsspital Graubunden, Chur, Switzerland
                [ ]Department of Critical Care Medicine, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre and University of Toronto, Toronto, ON Canada
                [ ]Queen Elizabeth University Hospital, Glasgow, UK
                [ ]Department of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria
                [ ]Division of Cardiology, Hadassah-Hebrew University Medical Center, Jerusalem, Israel
                [ ]Department of Anaesthesia and Perioperative Medicine, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa
                [ ]Population Health Research Institute, Hamilton Health Sciences, Hamilton, ON Canada
                [ ]Biostatistics Unit, St Joseph’s Healthcare, Hamilton, ON Canada
                [ ]Departments of Paediatrics and Anaesthesia, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON Canada
                [ ]Centre for Evaluation of Medicine, St Joseph’s Healthcare, Hamilton, ON Canada
                Article
                1936
                10.1186/s40064-016-1936-8
                4783313
                27066338
                933240a1-eae7-4e12-accb-8d47524e6895
                © Vanniyasingam et al. 2016

                Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.

                History
                : 22 September 2015
                : 25 February 2016
                Categories
                Research
                Custom metadata
                © The Author(s) 2016

                Uncategorized
                vascular surgery,minimum p value,roc curve approach,pre-operative risk,biostatistics,cardiovascular epidemiology

                Comments

                Comment on this article