Modeling and Risk Prediction in the Current Era of Interventional Cardiology
Open Access
- 15 April 2003
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Wolters Kluwer Health in Circulation
- Vol. 107 (14) , 1871-1876
- https://doi.org/10.1161/01.cir.0000065229.72905.78
Abstract
Background— Validation of in-hospital mortality models after percutaneous coronary interventions using multicenter data remains limited. Methods and Results— This study evaluated whether multivariable mortality models developed during the pre-stent era by New York State, American College of Cardiology (ACC)–National Cardiovascular Data Registry, Northern New England Cooperative Group, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, and the University of Michigan are relevant in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention in the 1997 to 1999 National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Dynamic Registry. Of 4448 Dynamic Registry patients, 73% received ≥1 stent and 28% received a IIB/IIIA receptor inhibitor. In-hospital mortality occurred in 64 patients (1.4%). The New York state model predicted mortality in 69 patients (1.5%; 95% confidence bounds [CI], 0.89% to 1.70%); Northern New England predicted mortality in 60 patients (1.3%; 95% CI, 1.0% to 1.7%); and Cleveland Clinic predicted mortality in 76 patients (1.7%; 95% CI, 1.3% to 2.1%). Among high-risk subgroups, with these 3 models, observed and predicted in-hospital mortality rates in general were not different. The other 2 models yielded different results. The University of Michigan predicted fewer deaths (n=47; 1.1%; 95% CI, 0.7% to 1.3%), and the ACC Registry model predicted 603 deaths (13.5%; 95% CI, 12.6% to 14.4%). Using the ACC Registry model, predicted mortality was higher than observed in each subgroup. Conclusions— Application of 5 mortality risk models developed from different data sets to patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention in the Dynamic Registry predicted, in 3 models, mortality rates that were not significantly different than those observed. In both high and low risk subgroups, the University of Michigan slightly underpredicted mortality, and the ACC Registry predicted significantly higher mortality than that observed.Keywords
This publication has 13 references indexed in Scilit:
- Development of a risk adjustment mortality model using the American College of Cardiology–National Cardiovascular Data Registry (ACC–NCDR) experience: 1998–2000Journal of the American College of Cardiology, 2002
- Simple Bedside Additive Tool for Prediction of In-Hospital Mortality After Percutaneous Coronary InterventionsCirculation, 2001
- Prediction of death after percutaneous coronary interventional proceduresAmerican Heart Journal, 2000
- Changing outcomes in percutaneous coronary interventions: A study of 34,752 procedures in Northern New England, 1990 to 1997Journal of the American College of Cardiology, 1999
- Multivariate prediction of in-hospital mortality after percutaneous coronary interventions in 1994–1996Journal of the American College of Cardiology, 1999
- Identification of variables needed to risk adjust outcomes of coronary interventions: evidence-based guidelines for efficient data collectionJournal of the American College of Cardiology, 1998
- MULTIVARIABLE PROGNOSTIC MODELS: ISSUES IN DEVELOPING MODELS, EVALUATING ASSUMPTIONS AND ADEQUACY, AND MEASURING AND REDUCING ERRORSStatistics in Medicine, 1996
- Development and validation of a simplified predictive index for major complications in contemporary percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty practiceJournal of the American College of Cardiology, 1995
- Percutaneous Transluminal Coronary Angioplasty in New York StateJAMA, 1992
- Best Subsets Logistic RegressionBiometrics, 1989