Derivation and validation of a practical risk score for prediction of mortality after open repair of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms in a US regional cohort and comparison to existing scoring systems.

Scoring systems for predicting mortality after repair of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms (RAAAs) have not been developed or tested in a United States population and may not be accurate in the endovascular era. Using prospectively collected data from the Vascular Study Group of New England (VSGNE), we developed a practical risk score for in-hospital mortality after open repair of RAAAs and compared its performance to that of the Glasgow aneurysm score, Hardman index, Vancouver score, and Edinburg ruptured aneurysm score. Univariate analysis followed by multivariable analysis of patient, prehospital, anatomic, and procedural characteristics identified significant predictors of in-hospital mortality. Integer points were derived from the odds ratio (OR) for mortality based on each independent predictor in order to generate a VSGNE RAAA risk score, which was internally validated using bootstrapping methodology. Discrimination and calibration of all models were assessed by calculating the area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve (C-statistic) and applying the Hosmer-Lemeshow test. From 2003 to 2009, 242 patients underwent open repair of RAAAs at 10 centers. In-hospital mortality was 38% (n = 91). Independent predictors of mortality included age >76 years (OR, 5.3; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.8-10.1), preoperative cardiac arrest (OR, 4.3; 95% CI, 1.6-12), loss of consciousness (OR, 2.6; 95% CI, 1.2-6), and suprarenal aortic clamp (OR, 2.4; 95% CI, 1.3-4.6). Patient stratification according to the VSGNE RAAA risk score (range, 0-6) accurately predicted mortality and identified those at low and high risk for death (8%, 25%, 37%, 60%, 80%, and 87% for scores of 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, and ≥5, respectively). Discrimination (C = .79) and calibration (χ(2) = 1.96; P = .85) were excellent in the derivation and bootstrap samples and superior to that of existing scoring systems. The Glasgow aneurysm score, Hardman index, Vancouver score, and Edinburg ruptured aneurysm score correlated with mortality in the VSGNE cohort but failed to identify accurately patients with a risk of mortality >65%. Existing scoring systems predict mortality after RAAA repair in this cohort but do not identify patients at highest risk. This parsimonious VSGNE RAAA risk score based on four variables readily assessed at the time of presentation allows accurate prediction of in-hospital mortality after open repair of RAAAs, including identification of those patients at highest risk for postoperative mortality.

Robinson WP ，Schanzer A ，Li Y ，Goodney PP ，Nolan BW ，Eslami MH ，Cronenwett JL ，Messina LM ... -  《-》

Risk Stratification of Ruptured Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms in Patients Treated by Open Surgical Repair.

The present study tested scoring models for ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms (rAAAs) in patients treated by open surgical repair (OSR). Scores were tested in a European population to validate their applicability for predicting outcome. Between 2002 and 2013, 92 patients with rAAAs underwent OSR and medical records were reviewed retrospectively. The Edinburgh Rupture Aneurysm Score (ERAS), Vascular Study Group of New England (VSGNE) rAAA risk score, Hardman Index, and Glasgow Aneurysm Score (GAS) were calculated and analyzed according to in hospital mortality. The discriminatory power and calibration of all models were assessed by applying the receiver operating characteristic and the Hosmer-Lemeshow test χ(2). An ERAS ≤ 1 (n = 55), 2 (n = 15) and 3 (n = 16) was associated with a mortality of 27%, 47%, and 69%, respectively. The calibration was the best of all tested scores (χ(2) = 0.44; p = .81) and the area under the curve (AUC) was 0.71 (95% CI 0.6-0.82; p = .001). A VSGNE rAAA risk score = 0 (n = 19), 1 (n = 15), 2 (n = 19), 3 (n = 25), and ≥ 4 (n = 9) was associated with a mortality of 11%, 20%, 32%, 72%, and 56%, and an AUC of 0.76 (95% CI 0.66-0.87; p = .001). The calibration was reduced (χ(2) = 6.9; p = .08). The GAS and Hardman Index increased stepwise with increasing in hospital mortality, but were inferior to ERAS and the VSGNE rAAA risk score. The Hardman Index showed the smallest AUC (0.68; 95% CI 0.56-0.80; p = .011) and demonstrated a lack of fit (χ(2) = 8.2; p = .04). The GAS showed good discrimination (AUC = 0.75; 95% CI 0.64-0.85; p < .001) and calibration (χ(2) = 0.85; p = .66); however, the parametric scale of GAS limits its use to classifying patients according to their risk. The present study revealed remarkable differences in survival between subgroups (10-70%) and underscores the need for risk stratification. The ERAS was favorable with striking ease of use and high accuracy in predicting outcome.

Krenzien F ，Wiltberger G ，Hau HM ，Matia I ，Benzing C ，Atanasov G ，Schmelzle M ，Fellmer PT ... -  《-》

Modern mortality risk stratification scores accurately and equally predict real-world postoperative mortality after ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm.

It is often unclear which patients presenting with a ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (rAAA) are likely to survive after surgery. The Harborview Medical Center (HMC), Dutch Aneurysm Score (DAS), and Vascular Study Group of New England (VSGNE) risk scores have been recent attempts at predicting mortality in this setting. We compared the prognostic value of these scoring systems for patients at our institution with rAAA. A retrospective chart review was performed for all patients who received surgery at our institution for rAAA between January 1, 2011, and November 27, 2019. The χ2, Fisher's exact, and t-tests were used to screen preoperative variables against in-hospital mortality. HMC, DAS, and VSGNE scores were calculated for each patient and tested against in-hospital mortality. Logistic regression and receiver operating characteristic curves were used to assess performance of each scoring system. Sixty-four patients were identified during the study period. Fifteen patients were excluded because 4 patients chose comfort care and an additional 11 patients were missing key variables. The final cohort for analysis included 49 patients who underwent surgery, including 33 patients receiving endovascular repair and 16 patients receiving open repair. The in-hospital mortality was 37% (24% for endovascular repair vs 63% for open repair). Individual variables associated with in-hospital mortality were lowest preoperative systolic blood pressure (P = .036), creatinine greater than 2.0 mg/dL (P = .020), first recorded intraoperative pH (P = .007), and use of suprarenal aortic control (P = .025), and preoperative cardiac arrest approached significance (P = .051). Plots of the HMC and VSGNE scores vs in-hospital mortality rate produced linear relationships (R2 = 0.97 and R2 = 0.93, respectively), in which a higher score was associated with a greater likelihood of mortality. On logistic regression analysis using HMC score components, creatinine greater than 2.0 mg/dL produced a significant association with in-hospital mortality (odds ratio, 12.3; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.1-131.7). Similar analysis using VSGNE components produced a significant association between suprarenal aortic control and in-hospital mortality (odds ratio, 5.5; 95% CI, 1.2-25.5). receiver operating characteristic curves produced an area under the curve of 0.74 (95% CI, 0.60-0.88), 0.73 (95% CI, 0.58-0.87), and 0.67 (95% CI, 0.51-0.83) for the HMC, VSGNE, and DAS, respectively. The HMC, VSGNE, and DAS scores performed similarly and adequately predicted in-hospital mortality after rAAA. The HMC score holds the added benefit of using preoperative variables, setting it apart as a valid prognostic indicator in the preoperative setting.

Ciaramella MA ，Ventarola D ，Ady J ，Rahimi S ，Beckerman WE ... -  《-》

Evaluation of five different aneurysm scoring systems to predict mortality in ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm patients.

Ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms (RAAAs) are associated with a high overall mortality (up to 25% to 35%) ≤30 days when offered surgical treatment. Risk prediction models can provide valuable information on surgical risks, guide clinical decision making, and help identify patients who should not be operated on to prevent futile surgery. Finally, they can be used to evaluate clinical outcome. Different aneurysm scores are available. New ones (with only four parameters) are being developed, such as the Dutch Aneurysm Score (DAS). This study analyzed and compared these scoring models. The study selected consecutive patients who presented with RAAA in two large vascular centers (Medisch Centrum Alkmaar and St. Antonius Nieuwegein) between 2005 and 2015. Variables necessary to retrospectively evaluate the scoring systems were registered in the patients' medical files. The discriminatory power and calibration were assessed using the receiver operating characteristic curve and the Hosmer-Lemeshow χ2 test. The study included 347 consecutive patients with RAAA. There were 298 men (85.9%), and the mean ± standard deviation age was 72.6 ± 8.1 years. The receiver operating characteristic curves were developed for the DAS, Glasgow Aneurysm Score (GAS), Edinburgh Ruptured Aneurysm Score, Vancouver Scoring System (VSS), and Hardman Index. The area under the curve was better for the VSS (0.716; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.647-0.786) than for the other scoring systems. Areas under the curve for the DAS (0.664; 95% CI, 0.592-0.736), Hardman Index (0.664; 95% CI, 0.592-0.736), Edinburgh Ruptured Aneurysm Score (0.621; 95% CI, 0.543-0.700), and GAS (0.591; 95% CI, 0.517-0.665) were slightly smaller, although only the difference between the VSS and GAS was statistically significant. Calibration showed a good fit for all models. The performance of the tested models for the prediction of mortality in RAAA patients was comparable, with only a statistically significant difference between the VSS and the GAS in favor of the VSS. However, an almost perfect prediction is needed to withhold intervention, and no existing scoring system is capable of that.

Vos CG ，de Vries JP ，Werson DA ，van Dongen EP ，Schreve MA ，Ünlü Ç ... -  《-》

Predictive models for mortality after ruptured aortic aneurysm repair do not predict futility and are not useful for clinical decision making.

The clinical decision-making utility of scoring algorithms for predicting mortality after ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms (rAAAs) remains unknown. We sought to determine the clinical utility of the algorithms compared with our clinical decision making and outcomes for management of rAAA during a 10-year period. Patients admitted with a diagnosis rAAA at a large university hospital were identified from 2005 to 2014. The Glasgow Aneurysm Score, Hardman Index, Vancouver Score, Edinburgh Ruptured Aneurysm Score, University of Washington Ruptured Aneurysm Score, Vascular Study Group of New England rAAA Risk Score, and the Artificial Neural Network Score were analyzed for accuracy in predicting mortality. Among patients quantified into the highest-risk group (predicted mortality >80%-85%), we compared the predicted with the actual outcome to determine how well these scores predicted futility. The cohort comprised 64 patients. Of those, 24 (38%) underwent open repair, 36 (56%) underwent endovascular repair, and 4 (6%) received only comfort care. Overall mortality was 30% (open repair, 26%; endovascular repair, 24%; no repair, 100%). As assessed by the scoring systems, 5% to 35% of patients were categorized as high-mortality risk. Intersystem agreement was poor, with κ values ranging from 0.06 to 0.79. Actual mortality was lower than the predicted mortality (50%-70% vs 78%-100%) for all scoring systems, with each scoring system overestimating mortality by 10% to 50%. Mortality rates for patients not designated into the high-risk cohort were dramatically lower, ranging from 7% to 29%. Futility, defined as 100% mortality, was predicted in five of 63 patients with the Hardman Index and in two of 63 of the University of Washington score. Of these, surgery was not offered to one of five and one of two patients, respectively. If one of these two models were used to withhold operative intervention, the mortality of these patients would have been 100%. The actual mortality for these patients was 60% and 50%, respectively. Clinical algorithms for predicting mortality after rAAA were not useful for predicting futility. Most patients with rAAA were not classified in the highest-risk group by the clinical decision models. Among patients identified as highest risk, predicted mortality was overestimated compared with actual mortality. The data from this study support the limited value to surgeons of the currently published algorithms.

Thompson PC ，Dalman RL ，Harris EJ ，Chandra V ，Lee JT ，Mell MW ... -  《-》