Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34078100›Full record

ArticleCirculation. Cardiovascular quality and outcomes2021

Toward Dynamic Risk Prediction of Outcomes After Coronary Artery Bypass Graft: Improving Risk Prediction With Intraoperative Events Using Gradient Boosting.

Makoto Mori, Thomas J S Durant, Chenxi Huang, Bobak J Mortazavi, Andreas Coppi, Raymond A Jean, Arnar Geirsson, Wade L Schulz, Harlan M Krumholz

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Circulation. Cardiovascular quality and outcomes, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Coronary Artery Surgery: Past, Present, and Future.Rambam Maimonides medical journal · 2024
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Makoto MoriCenter for Outcomes Research and Evaluation, Yale New Haven Hospital, CT (M.M., T.J.S.D., C.H., B.J.M., R.A.J, A.C., W.L.S., H.M.K).
Thomas J S DurantCenter for Outcomes Research and Evaluation, Yale New Haven Hospital, CT (M.M., T.J.S.D., C.H., B.J.M., R.A.J, A.C., W.L.S., H.M.K).
Chenxi HuangCenter for Outcomes Research and Evaluation, Yale New Haven Hospital, CT (M.M., T.J.S.D., C.H., B.J.M., R.A.J, A.C., W.L.S., H.M.K).
Bobak J MortazaviCenter for Outcomes Research and Evaluation, Yale New Haven Hospital, CT (M.M., T.J.S.D., C.H., B.J.M., R.A.J, A.C., W.L.S., H.M.K).
Andreas CoppiCenter for Outcomes Research and Evaluation, Yale New Haven Hospital, CT (M.M., T.J.S.D., C.H., B.J.M., R.A.J, A.C., W.L.S., H.M.K).
Raymond A JeanCenter for Outcomes Research and Evaluation, Yale New Haven Hospital, CT (M.M., T.J.S.D., C.H., B.J.M., R.A.J, A.C., W.L.S., H.M.K).
Arnar Geirsson
Wade L SchulzCenter for Outcomes Research and Evaluation, Yale New Haven Hospital, CT (M.M., T.J.S.D., C.H., B.J.M., R.A.J, A.C., W.L.S., H.M.K).
Harlan M KrumholzCenter for Outcomes Research and Evaluation, Yale New Haven Hospital, CT (M.M., T.J.S.D., C.H., B.J.M., R.A.J, A.C., W.L.S., H.M.K).

Funding

Yale Clinical and Translational Science Award (U Component)UL1TR001863 · NCATS · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI John H. Krystal, LUCILA OHNO-MACHADO · 2016 to 2026
$102.9M
SCH: INT: A Context-aware Cuff-less Wearable Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitor using a Bio-Impedance Sensor ArrayR01EB028106 · NIBIB · TEXAS ENGINEERING EXPERIMENT STATION · PI JAFARI, ROOZBEH · 2018 to 2021
$1.2M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR001863NIBIB NIH HHS R01 EB028106
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIntraoperative data may improve models predicting postoperative events. We evaluated the effect of incorporating intraoperative variables to the existing preoperative model on the predictive performance of the model for coronary artery bypass graft.

methodsWe analyzed 378 572 isolated coronary artery bypass graft cases performed across 1083 centers, using the national Society of Thoracic Surgeons Adult Cardiac Surgery Database between 2014 and 2016. Outcomes were operative mortality, 5 postoperative complications, and composite representation of all events. We fitted models by logistic regression or extreme gradient boosting (XGBoost). For each modeling approach, we used preoperative only, intraoperative only, or pre+intraoperative variables. We developed 84 models with unique combinations of the 3 variable sets, 2 variable selection methods, 2 modeling approaches, and 7 outcomes. Each model was tested in 20 iterations of 70:30 stratified random splitting into development/testing samples. Model performances were evaluated on the testing dataset using the C statistic, area under the precision-recall curve, and calibration metrics, including the Brier score.

resultsThe mean patient age was 65.3 years, and 24.7% were women. Operative mortality, excluding intraoperative death, occurred in 1.9%. In all outcomes, models that considered pre+intraoperative variables demonstrated significantly improved Brier score and area under the precision-recall curve compared with models considering pre or intraoperative variables alone. XGBoost without external variable selection had the best C statistics, Brier score, and area under the precision-recall curve values in 4 of the 7 outcomes (mortality, renal failure, prolonged ventilation, and composite) compared with logistic regression models with or without variable selection. Based on the calibration plots, risk restratification for mortality showed that the logistic regression model underestimated the risk in 11 114 patients (9.8%) and overestimated in 12 005 patients (10.6%). In contrast, the XGBoost model underestimated the risk in 7218 patients (6.4%) and overestimated in 0 patients (0%).

conclusionsIn isolated coronary artery bypass graft, adding intraoperative variables to preoperative variables resulted in improved predictions of all 7 outcomes. Risk models based on XGBoost may provide a better prediction of adverse events to guide clinical care.

Indexed as

Cardiac Surgical ProceduresCoronary Artery BypassAdultAgedFemaleHumansLogistic ModelsPostoperative ComplicationsRisk AssessmentRisk Factorsbenchmarkingcoronary artery bypassmachine learningmedical informaticsprobability learning

Identifiers

PMID34078100
PMCPMC8635167

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.