Proposed Research Plan for the Derivation of a New Cardiac Risk Index. (March 2015)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Biccard, Bruce
• Is Part Of: Anesthesia & analgesia. Volume 120:Number 3(2015)
• Publication Date: 2015-03
• Subjects: Anesthesiology -- Periodicals; Anesthesia; Anesthesiology; Analgesia; Analgesics; Anesthesiology -- Periodicals; 617.9605
• DOI: 10.1213/ANE.0000000000000598
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0003-2999

Abstract

<abstract> <title> <x xml:space="preserve">Abstract</x> </title> <sec> <p>The Revised Cardiac Risk Index (RCRI) was incorporated into the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) recommendations for the preoperative evaluation of the cardiac patient for noncardiac surgery. The purpose of this review was to analyze studies on cardiovascular clinical risk prediction that had used the previous "standard best" model, the RCRI, as a comparator. This review aims to determine whether modification of the current risk factors or adoption of other risk factors or other risk indices would improve upon the discrimination of cardiac risk prediction when compared with the RCRI. This is necessary because recent risk prediction models have shown better discrimination for major adverse cardiac events, and the pre-eminence of the RCRI is now in question. There is now a need for a new "best standard" cardiovascular risk prediction model to supersede the RCRI. This is desirable because it would: (1) allow for a global standard of cardiovascular risk assessment; (2) provide a standard comparator in all risk prediction research; (3) result in comparable data collection; and (4) allow for individual patient data meta-analyses. This should lead to continued progress in cardiovascular clinical risk prediction. A review of the current evidence suggests that to improve the preoperative clinical risk stratification for adverse cardiac events, a new risk stratification model be built that maintains the clinical risk factors identified in the RCRI, with the following modifications: (1) additional glomerular filtration rate cut points (as opposed to a single creatinine cut point); (2) age; (3) a history of peripheral vascular disease; (4) functional capacity; and (5) a specific surgical procedural category. One would expect a substantial improvement in the discrimination of the RCRI with this approach. Although most noncardiac surgeries will benefit from a standard "generic" cardiovascular risk prediction model, there are data to suggest that patients with human immunodeficiency virus disease who are undergoing vascular surgery may benefit from specific cardiovascular risk prediction models.</p> </sec> </abstract>