ArticleJournal of cardiothoracic surgery2025
External validation of SYNTAX score II in a real-world cohort undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting.
Article in Journal of cardiothoracic surgery, 2025. 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.
- Personalized Treatment of Patients with Coronary Artery Disease: The Value and Limitations of Predictive Models.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundOur aim was to evaluate SYNTAX Score II for its ability to predict mortality in all-comers undergoing isolated coronary artery bypass grafting.
methodsExternal validation of SYNTAX Score II was performed in a retrospective analysis of 2 tertiary care centers. Mortality at 4 years after surgery was defined as the primary outcome variable. External validation included assessment of calibration (calibration-in-the-large, observed-expected ratio, calibration slope) and discrimination (concordance statistic, Receiver Operating Characteristic curve). Additionally, SYNTAX Score II's performance was compared with the performance of EuroSCORE II, the logistic EuroSCORE, and ACEF Score.
resultsThe study cohort included 1454 patients (Medical University of Vienna, n = 782; Medical University of Innsbruck, n = 672). Kaplan-Meier survival curves showed that tertiles of SYNTAX Score II were significantly associated with mortality (log-rank test, p < 0.001). In a stratified multivariable Cox proportional-hazards regression model, the following score components were independently associated with mortality: age (hazard ratio 1.03, 95% confidence interval 1.00 to 1.06), creatinine clearance (hazard ratio 0.98, 95% confidence interval 0.97 to 0.99), left-ventricular ejection fraction (hazard ratio 0.97, 95% confidence interval 0.95 to 0.98), and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (hazard ratio 2.02, 95% confidence interval 1.34 to 3.05). The anatomical SYNTAX Score was not independently associated with mortality (hazard ratio 1.00, 95% confidence interval 0.98 to 1.02). Assessment of SYNTAX Score II calibration revealed an observed-expected ratio of 0.61 and a calibration slope of 0.62 (p < 0.001 for comparison with slope = 1.0), indicating general overestimation of 4-year mortality. The c-statistic amounted to 0.73. Performance of SYNTAX Score II was comparable with the performance of EuroSCORE II (c-statistic 0.73), the logistic EuroSCORE (c-statistic 0.74) and ACEF Score (c-statistic 0.72).
conclusionsOur analysis shows that SYNTAX Score II has acceptable discriminative strength with respect to 4-year mortality in all-comers undergoing isolated coronary artery bypass grafting. Notably, mortality is over-estimated in patients with higher SYNTAX Score II values. SYNTAX Score II, EuroSCORE II, the logistic EuroSCORE, and ACEF Score offer comparable predictive value towards 4-year mortality.
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.