ArticlePediatric cardiology2026
Use of CRISP Modifiers for Adults Undergoing Cardiac Catheterization Procedures: A Single Center Experience.
Article in Pediatric cardiology, 2026. 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.
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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The Catheterization RISk Score for Pediatrics (CRISP) has been validated and widely adopted as a model to predict adverse outcomes. We sought to determine if the addition of three modifiers (NYHA Class > 2, prior sternotomies > 2, and BMI > 30) to the CRISP score would better predict adverse events (AE) in adults undergoing cardiac catheterization at our institution. All adults (> 18 years) who underwent cardiac catheterization at the Children's Hospital Colorado from November 2016 to November 2021 were included. Baseline and modified CRISP scores with adult modifiers and AEs were analyzed. Of a total of 401 cases, there were 27 AEs (6.7%). A higher CRISP score was associated with an increased risk of AEs (p = 0.004). A ROC analysis of the CRISP score gave a AUC of 66% with a cut-off point of 5.5 giving a sensitivity of 74% and specificity of 52%. The modifiers individually did not significantly correlate with AEs. Higher modified CRISP score was similarly associated with an increased risk of AEs (p = 0.01). ROC analysis for the modified CRISP score gave an AUC of 64%. A cut-off point of 6.5 gave the best result with a sensitivity of 59% and specificity of 61%. A modified CRISP score which included adult modifiers similarly predicts AEs in adults with congenital heart disease. These adult modifiers are easy to incorporate into the CRISP score. The CRISP score also predicted AEs in adults with congenital heart disease.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39702852What 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.