ArticleJournal of thoracic disease2024
Validation of the American College of Surgeons surgical risk calculator for thoracic surgery.
Article in Journal of thoracic disease, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Nomogram Development and Feature Selection Strategy Comparison for Predicting Surgical Site Infection After Lower Extremity Fracture Surgery.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Advances in medicine and surgical techniques make it possible to operate on selected comorbid elderly patients for whom risk assessment is essential. We aimed to validate the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS NSQIP) surgical risk calculator specifically for thoracic surgery. Methods: This study retrospectively included 283 consecutive patients who all underwent various thoracic surgeries at our center. Considering "serious complication" as the most important outcome, we compared the predicted risk scores with the observed incidence of 30-day morbidity and mortality. We calculated the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) with 95% confidence intervals for each outcome and utilized the Brier score to check the calibration and complication odds ratios above vs. below average risk in all score outcomes with the number of occurred events. Results: In our study population, most patients were <65 years old (48%), predominantly male (63%), and overweight or obese (48%). In addition, 13% had severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), and 75% were categorized as American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) class III or higher. For "serious complication", AUROC was 59%, and events were equal in patients with above or below average risk scores (P=0.96). AUROC was 67% for "any complication" and 58% for "return to OR", expressing no useful predictive value. The Brier score and odds ratios were low for all outcomes. Dyspnea, ASA class, COPD, and body mass index as single postoperative risk predictors significantly improved the basic model consisting of the logit of the risk calculator alone. Thus, the calculator alone did not perform as well as these single variables did. Conclusions: The ACS NSQIP surgical risk calculator exhibited low sensitivity, specificity, and low AUROC for postoperative 30-day morbidity and mortality in our study cohort. Therefore, we think it cannot be considered as valid risk estimation tool for general thoracic surgery.
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.