ArticleAnnals of vascular surgery2021
Validation of ERICVA Risk Score as a Predictor of One Year Amputation-Free Survival of Patients with Critical Limb Ischemia.
Article in Annals of vascular surgery, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe ERICVA score was derived to predict amputation-free survival in patients with critical limb ischemia (CLI). It may be a useful tool to stratify patients in trials of novel interventions to treat CLI but, as yet, it has not been externally validated.
methodsA prospective database of CLI patients was developed during prescreening of patients for a phase 1 stem cell therapy clinical trial. The primary outcome was amputation free survival (AFS) at 1 year. Both the full ERICVA scale (11 parameters) and simplified ERICVA scale (5 parameters) were validated. Data analysis was performed by calculation of the area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve examining the predictive value of the scores. The Chi-square test was used to examine the association between risk group and one-year AFS and the cumulative survival of the three risk groups was compared using Kaplan Meier survival curves.
resultsA series of 179 CLI patients were included in the analysis. The Chi-square test of independence showed a significant association between the risk group (high, medium and low) and one-year AFS outcome (P = 0.0007). Kaplan-Meier survival curve showed significant difference in one-year AFS between the three risk groups (log-rank P < 0.001). The area under the curve (AUC) was found to be 0.63 and 0.61 for the full and simplified score, respectively. The sensitivity of the full score was 0.44 with specificity of 0.84. The simplified score had a sensitivity of 0.28 and specificity of 0.92.
conclusionThe ERICVA risk score system was found to have a fair validity but cannot be considered reliable as a single predictor of one year AFS of CLI patients. The simplified score had an AUC almost identical to the full score and can accordingly replace the full score.
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.