ArticleBrazilian journal of cardiovascular surgery2020
Predicting Outcomes of Penetrating Cardiovascular Injuries at a Rural Center by Different Scoring Systems.
Article in Brazilian journal of cardiovascular surgery, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Predicting surgical resource consumption and in-hospital mortality in resource-scarce conflict settings: a retrospective study.BMC emergency medicine · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo compare the anatomical and physiological scoring systems and the outcomes of surgical management of penetrating cardiovascular trauma at a rural center.
methodsSeventy-seven patients underwent emergency surgery at our center between January/2012 and October/2018 due to penetrating cardiovascular trauma. Injury Severity Score (ISS), Revised Trauma Score (RTS), New Injury Severity Score (NISS), and Trauma and Injury Severity Score (TRISS) were calculated. The validation of these risk scores to predict mortality was assessed by the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve analysis.
resultsAll trauma scores were correlated with mortality. As ISS, NISS, and TRISS values increased and RTS values decreased, the mortality rate increased. The area under the curve (AUC) in the receiver operating characteristic curve analysis was 0.943 for TRISS, 0.915 for RTS, 0.890 for ISS, and 0.896 for NISS (P<0.001 for each). Logistic regression analysis revealed that scores were correlated with mortality (P<0.001 for each). By investigating cardiac injuries alone, only TRISS and RTS results correlated with mortality for cardiac injuries (Mann-Whitney U test, P=0.003 and P=0.01, respectively). The AUC was only statistically significant for TRISS and RTS (AUC=0.929, P<0.05 for both). For vascular injuries, all the scores were significantly correlated with in-hospital mortality (Mann-Whitney U test, P<0.001 for each). TRISS had the highest AUC (AUC=0.946, P<0.001).
conclusionTRISS has the highest predictivity for in-hospital mortality in patients with penetrating cardiovascular trauma.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.