7 research outputs found

    Prognostic models for mortality after cardiac surgery in patients with infective endocarditis: a systematic review and aggregation of prediction models.

    Get PDF
    Background There are several prognostic models to estimate the risk of mortality after surgery for active infective endocarditis (IE). However, these models incorporate different predictors and their performance is uncertain. Objective We systematically reviewed and critically appraised all available prediction models of postoperative mortality in patients undergoing surgery for IE, and aggregated them into a meta-model. Data sources We searched Medline and EMBASE databases from inception to June 2020. Study eligibility criteria We included studies that developed or updated a prognostic model of postoperative mortality in patient with IE. Methods We assessed the risk of bias of the models using PROBAST (Prediction model Risk Of Bias ASsessment Tool) and we aggregated them into an aggregate meta-model based on stacked regressions and optimized it for a nationwide registry of IE patients. The meta-model performance was assessed using bootstrap validation methods and adjusted for optimism. Results We identified 11 prognostic models for postoperative mortality. Eight models had a high risk of bias. The meta-model included weighted predictors from the remaining three models (EndoSCORE, specific ES-I and specific ES-II), which were not rated as high risk of bias and provided full model equations. Additionally, two variables (age and infectious agent) that had been modelled differently across studies, were estimated based on the nationwide registry. The performance of the meta-model was better than the original three models, with the corresponding performance measures: C-statistics 0.79 (95% CI 0.76–0.82), calibration slope 0.98 (95% CI 0.86–1.13) and calibration-in-the-large –0.05 (95% CI –0.20 to 0.11). Conclusions The meta-model outperformed published models and showed a robust predictive capacity for predicting the individualized risk of postoperative mortality in patients with IE. Protocol registration PROSPERO (registration number CRD42020192602).pre-print270 K

    Prognostic models for mortality after cardiac surgery in patients with infective endocarditis: a systematic review and aggregation of prediction models

    Full text link
    Background: There are several prognostic models to estimate the risk of mortality after surgery for active infective endocarditis (IE). However, these models incorporate different predictors and their performance is uncertain. Objective: We systematically reviewed and critically appraised all available prediction models of postoperative mortality in patients undergoing surgery for IE, and aggregated them into a meta-model. Data sources: We searched Medline and EMBASE databases from inception to June 2020. Study eligibility criteria: We included studies that developed or updated a prognostic model of postoperative mortality in patient with IE. Methods: We assessed the risk of bias of the models using PROBAST (Prediction model Risk Of Bias ASsessment Tool) and we aggregated them into an aggregate meta-model based on stacked regressions and optimized it for a nationwide registry of IE patients. The meta-model performance was assessed using bootstrap validation methods and adjusted for optimism. Results: We identified 11 prognostic models for postoperative mortality. Eight models had a high risk of bias. The meta-model included weighted predictors from the remaining three models (EndoSCORE, specific ES-I and specific ES-II), which were not rated as high risk of bias and provided full model equations. Additionally, two variables (age and infectious agent) that had been modelled differently across studies, were estimated based on the nationwide registry. The performance of the meta-model was better than the original three models, with the corresponding performance measures: C-statistics 0.79 (95% CI 0.76–0.82), calibration slope 0.98 (95% CI 0.86–1.13) and calibration-in-the-large –0.05 (95% CI –0.20 to 0.11). Conclusions: The meta-model outperformed published models and showed a robust predictive capacity for predicting the individualized risk of postoperative mortality in patients with IE

    Geodivulgar: GeologĂ­a y Sociedad

    No full text
    Depto. de GeodinĂĄmica, EstratigrafĂ­a y PaleontologĂ­aDepto. de QuĂ­mica InorgĂĄnicaDepto. de DidĂĄctica de las Ciencias Experimentales , Sociales y MatemĂĄticasFac. de Ciencias GeolĂłgicasFac. de Ciencias QuĂ­micasFac. de EducaciĂłnFALSEsubmitte

    Characteristics and predictors of death among 4035 consecutively hospitalized patients with COVID-19 in Spain

    No full text

    Overall survival in the OlympiA phase III trial of adjuvant olaparib in patients with germline pathogenic variants in BRCA1/2 and high-risk, early breast cancer

    No full text
    International audienc

    Global attitudes in the management of acute appendicitis during COVID-19 pandemic: ACIE Appy Study

    No full text
    Background: Surgical strategies are being adapted to face the COVID-19 pandemic. Recommendations on the management of acute appendicitis have been based on expert opinion, but very little evidence is available. This study addressed that dearth with a snapshot of worldwide approaches to appendicitis. Methods: The Association of Italian Surgeons in Europe designed an online survey to assess the current attitude of surgeons globally regarding the management of patients with acute appendicitis during the pandemic. Questions were divided into baseline information, hospital organization and screening, personal protective equipment, management and surgical approach, and patient presentation before versus during the pandemic. Results: Of 744 answers, 709 (from 66 countries) were complete and were included in the analysis. Most hospitals were treating both patients with and those without COVID. There was variation in screening indications and modality used, with chest X-ray plus molecular testing (PCR) being the commonest (19\ub78 per cent). Conservative management of complicated and uncomplicated appendicitis was used by 6\ub76 and 2\ub74 per cent respectively before, but 23\ub77 and 5\ub73 per cent, during the pandemic (both P < 0\ub7001). One-third changed their approach from laparoscopic to open surgery owing to the popular (but evidence-lacking) advice from expert groups during the initial phase of the pandemic. No agreement on how to filter surgical smoke plume during laparoscopy was identified. There was an overall reduction in the number of patients admitted with appendicitis and one-third felt that patients who did present had more severe appendicitis than they usually observe. Conclusion: Conservative management of mild appendicitis has been possible during the pandemic. The fact that some surgeons switched to open appendicectomy may reflect the poor guidelines that emanated in the early phase of SARS-CoV-2

    Evaluation of a quality improvement intervention to reduce anastomotic leak following right colectomy (EAGLE): pragmatic, batched stepped-wedge, cluster-randomized trial in 64 countries

    No full text
    Background Anastomotic leak affects 8 per cent of patients after right colectomy with a 10-fold increased risk of postoperative death. The EAGLE study aimed to develop and test whether an international, standardized quality improvement intervention could reduce anastomotic leaks. Methods The internationally intended protocol, iteratively co-developed by a multistage Delphi process, comprised an online educational module introducing risk stratification, an intraoperative checklist, and harmonized surgical techniques. Clusters (hospital teams) were randomized to one of three arms with varied sequences of intervention/data collection by a derived stepped-wedge batch design (at least 18 hospital teams per batch). Patients were blinded to the study allocation. Low- and middle-income country enrolment was encouraged. The primary outcome (assessed by intention to treat) was anastomotic leak rate, and subgroup analyses by module completion (at least 80 per cent of surgeons, high engagement; less than 50 per cent, low engagement) were preplanned. Results A total 355 hospital teams registered, with 332 from 64 countries (39.2 per cent low and middle income) included in the final analysis. The online modules were completed by half of the surgeons (2143 of 4411). The primary analysis included 3039 of the 3268 patients recruited (206 patients had no anastomosis and 23 were lost to follow-up), with anastomotic leaks arising before and after the intervention in 10.1 and 9.6 per cent respectively (adjusted OR 0.87, 95 per cent c.i. 0.59 to 1.30; P = 0.498). The proportion of surgeons completing the educational modules was an influence: the leak rate decreased from 12.2 per cent (61 of 500) before intervention to 5.1 per cent (24 of 473) after intervention in high-engagement centres (adjusted OR 0.36, 0.20 to 0.64; P &lt; 0.001), but this was not observed in low-engagement hospitals (8.3 per cent (59 of 714) and 13.8 per cent (61 of 443) respectively; adjusted OR 2.09, 1.31 to 3.31). Conclusion Completion of globally available digital training by engaged teams can alter anastomotic leak rates. Registration number: NCT04270721 (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov)
    corecore