External Validation of the Cardiac Surgery Score in a Quaternary Hospital in the United States of America. (October 2022)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Singh, Asha; Liang, Chen; Mick, Stephanie L.; Udeh, Chiedozie
• Is Part Of: Journal of intensive care medicine. Volume 37:Number 10(2022)
• Page Start: 1318
• Page End: 1327
• Publication Date: 2022-10
• Subjects: cardiac surgery score -- CASUS -- cardiac surgery outcomes -- 30-day mortality -- additive CASUS -- logistic CASUS; Critical care medicine -- Periodicals; Critical Care -- Periodicals; Soins intensifs -- Périodiques; Soins intensifs; Périodique électronique (Descripteur de forme); Ressource Internet (Descripteur de forme); 616.02805
• DOI: 10.1177/08850666211066820
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0885-0666

Abstract

Background: The Cardiac Surgery Score (CASUS) was developed to assist in predicting post-cardiac surgery mortality using parameters measured in the intensive care unit. It is calculated by assigning points to ten physiologic variables and adding them to obtain a score (additive CASUS), or by logistic regression to weight the variables and estimate the probability of mortality (logistic CASUS). Both additive and logistic CASUS have been externally validated elsewhere, but not yet in the United States of America (USA). This study aims to validate CASUS in a quaternary hospital in the USA and compare the predictive performance of additive to logistic CASUS in this setting. Methods: Additive and logistic CASUS (postoperative days 1-5) were calculated for 7098 patients at Cleveland Clinic from January 2015 to February 2017. 30-day mortality data were abstracted from institutional records and the Death Registries for Ohio State and the Centers for Disease Control. Given a low event rate, model discrimination was assessed by area under the curve (AUROC), partial AUROC (pAUC), and average precision (AP). Calibration was assessed by curves and quantified using Harrell's Emax, and Integrated Calibration Index (ICI). Results: 30-day mortality rate was 1.37%. For additive CASUS, odds ratio for mortality was 1.41 (1.35-1.46, P <0.001). Additive and logistic CASUS had comparable pAUC and AUROC (all >0.83). However, additive CASUS had greater AP, especially on postoperative day 1 (0.22 vs. 0.11). Additive CASUS had better calibration curves, and lower Emax, and ICI on all days. Conclusions: Additive and logistic CASUS discriminated well for postoperative 30-day mortality in our quaternary center in the USA, however logistic CASUS under-predicted mortality in our cohort. Given its ease of calculation, and better predictive accuracy, additive CASUS may be the preferred model for postoperative use. Validation in more typical cardiac surgery centers in the USA is recommended.