ArticleRevista da Associacao Medica Brasileira (1992)2026
Limitations of cardiac risk scores in elective non-cardiac surgeries: a Brazilian cohort.
Article in Revista da Associacao Medica Brasileira (1992), 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionSurgical procedures are associated with an excess of postoperative cardiovascular events. Risk scores are used for cardiovascular stratification but lack proper validation across diverse populations.
objectiveThe aim of this study was to assess the accuracy of the Revised Cardiac Risk Index, American College of Physicians score, and intuitive clinical judgment in predicting postoperative cardiovascular complications.
methodsIn this prospective, longitudinal study, adults assessed for cardiovascular risk undergoing elective non-cardiac surgery were included. Perioperative clinical variables, Revised Cardiac Risk Index, American College of Physicians, and clinical judgment were evaluated, as well as in-hospital and 30-day postoperative outcomes. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, and score performance was assessed by C-statistics.
resultsA total of 420 participants, with a mean age of 64.1±12.6 years, were studied, of which 47.1% were female and 71.2% were Black/Hispanic. Among the studied patients, 74.3% had hypertension, 32.9% were diabetics, 13.1% had heart failure, 11.2% had coronary artery disease, and 7.9% had stroke. Preoperative risk levels (low/medium/high) were as follows: Revised Cardiac Risk Index 88%/10.5%/1.4%; American College of Physicians 71.2%/27.4%/1.4%; and clinical judgment 64.5%/33.1%/2.4%. During hospitalization, there were 11 deaths, 3 myocardial infarctions, and 1 acute pulmonary edema. The risk scores showed poor discrimination for death and combined in-hospital cardiovascular outcomes, with area under the receiver operating characteristic curve <0.70. Cardiologist judgment performed slightly better than the scores. Results were similar for major and non-major surgeries, and when evaluating only patients aged 50 years or older.
conclusionCardiac risk assessment demonstrated low accuracy in predicting in-hospital postoperative cardiovascular outcomes, regardless of surgical magnitude.
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.