Prediction models for clinical outcome after a carotid revascularization procedure: an external validation study
<h4>Background and Purpose</h4> <p>Prediction models may help physicians to stratify patients with high and low risk for periprocedural complications or long-term stroke risk after carotid artery stenting (CAS) or carotid endarterectomy (CEA). We aimed to evaluate external perform...
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Formato: | Journal article |
| Publicado: |
American Heart Association
2018
|
| _version_ | 1826289901897777152 |
|---|---|
| author | Volkers, EJ Algra, A Kappelle, LJ Roubin, GS Jansen, O Howard, G Hendrikse, J Halliday, AW Gregson, J Fraedrich, G Eckstein, H-H Calvet, D Bulbulia, R Brown, MM Becquemin, J-P Ringleb, PA Mas, J-L Bonati, LH Brott, TG Greving, JP |
| author_facet | Volkers, EJ Algra, A Kappelle, LJ Roubin, GS Jansen, O Howard, G Hendrikse, J Halliday, AW Gregson, J Fraedrich, G Eckstein, H-H Calvet, D Bulbulia, R Brown, MM Becquemin, J-P Ringleb, PA Mas, J-L Bonati, LH Brott, TG Greving, JP |
| author_sort | Volkers, EJ |
| collection | OXFORD |
| description | <h4>Background and Purpose</h4> <p>Prediction models may help physicians to stratify patients with high and low risk for periprocedural complications or long-term stroke risk after carotid artery stenting (CAS) or carotid endarterectomy (CEA). We aimed to evaluate external performance of previously published prediction models for short- and long-term outcome after carotid revascularization in patients with symptomatic carotid artery stenosis.</p> <h4>Methods</h4> <p>From a systematic review, we selected all prediction models that used only readily available patient characteristics known before procedure initiation. Follow-up data from 2,184 CAS and 2,261 CEA patients from four randomized trials (EVA-3S, SPACE, ICSS, and CREST) were used to validate 23 short-term outcome models to estimate stroke or death risk ≤30 days after the procedure and the original outcome measure for which the model was developed. Additionally, we validated seven long-term outcome models for the original outcome measure. Predictive performance of the models was assessed with c-statistics and calibration plots.</p> <h4>Results</h4> <p>Stroke or death ≤30 days after the procedure occurred in 158 (7.2%) patients after CAS and in 84 (3.7%) patients after CEA. Most models for short-term outcome after CAS (n=4) or CEA (n=19) had poor discriminative performance (c-statistics ranging from 0.49 to 0.64) and poor calibration with small absolute risk differences between the lowest and highest risk groups and overestimation of risk in the highest risk groups. Long-term outcome models (n=7) had slightly better performance with c-statistics ranging from 0.59 to 0.67 and reasonable calibration.</p> <h4>Conclusions</h4> <p>Current models did not reliably predict outcome after carotid revascularization in a trial population of patients with symptomatic carotid stenosis. In particular, prediction of short-term outcome appeared to be difficult. Further external validation of existing prediction models or development of new prediction models is needed before such models can be used to support treatment decisions in individual patients.</p> |
| first_indexed | 2024-03-07T02:35:58Z |
| format | Journal article |
| id | oxford-uuid:a8d02350-bf9f-4d50-be52-8c601163880b |
| institution | University of Oxford |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-07T02:35:58Z |
| publishDate | 2018 |
| publisher | American Heart Association |
| record_format | dspace |
| spelling | oxford-uuid:a8d02350-bf9f-4d50-be52-8c601163880b2022-03-27T03:04:05ZPrediction models for clinical outcome after a carotid revascularization procedure: an external validation studyJournal articlehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_dcae04bcuuid:a8d02350-bf9f-4d50-be52-8c601163880bSymplectic Elements at OxfordAmerican Heart Association2018Volkers, EJAlgra, AKappelle, LJRoubin, GSJansen, OHoward, GHendrikse, JHalliday, AWGregson, JFraedrich, GEckstein, H-HCalvet, DBulbulia, RBrown, MMBecquemin, J-PRingleb, PAMas, J-LBonati, LHBrott, TGGreving, JP <h4>Background and Purpose</h4> <p>Prediction models may help physicians to stratify patients with high and low risk for periprocedural complications or long-term stroke risk after carotid artery stenting (CAS) or carotid endarterectomy (CEA). We aimed to evaluate external performance of previously published prediction models for short- and long-term outcome after carotid revascularization in patients with symptomatic carotid artery stenosis.</p> <h4>Methods</h4> <p>From a systematic review, we selected all prediction models that used only readily available patient characteristics known before procedure initiation. Follow-up data from 2,184 CAS and 2,261 CEA patients from four randomized trials (EVA-3S, SPACE, ICSS, and CREST) were used to validate 23 short-term outcome models to estimate stroke or death risk ≤30 days after the procedure and the original outcome measure for which the model was developed. Additionally, we validated seven long-term outcome models for the original outcome measure. Predictive performance of the models was assessed with c-statistics and calibration plots.</p> <h4>Results</h4> <p>Stroke or death ≤30 days after the procedure occurred in 158 (7.2%) patients after CAS and in 84 (3.7%) patients after CEA. Most models for short-term outcome after CAS (n=4) or CEA (n=19) had poor discriminative performance (c-statistics ranging from 0.49 to 0.64) and poor calibration with small absolute risk differences between the lowest and highest risk groups and overestimation of risk in the highest risk groups. Long-term outcome models (n=7) had slightly better performance with c-statistics ranging from 0.59 to 0.67 and reasonable calibration.</p> <h4>Conclusions</h4> <p>Current models did not reliably predict outcome after carotid revascularization in a trial population of patients with symptomatic carotid stenosis. In particular, prediction of short-term outcome appeared to be difficult. Further external validation of existing prediction models or development of new prediction models is needed before such models can be used to support treatment decisions in individual patients.</p> |
| spellingShingle | Volkers, EJ Algra, A Kappelle, LJ Roubin, GS Jansen, O Howard, G Hendrikse, J Halliday, AW Gregson, J Fraedrich, G Eckstein, H-H Calvet, D Bulbulia, R Brown, MM Becquemin, J-P Ringleb, PA Mas, J-L Bonati, LH Brott, TG Greving, JP Prediction models for clinical outcome after a carotid revascularization procedure: an external validation study |
| title | Prediction models for clinical outcome after a carotid revascularization procedure: an external validation study |
| title_full | Prediction models for clinical outcome after a carotid revascularization procedure: an external validation study |
| title_fullStr | Prediction models for clinical outcome after a carotid revascularization procedure: an external validation study |
| title_full_unstemmed | Prediction models for clinical outcome after a carotid revascularization procedure: an external validation study |
| title_short | Prediction models for clinical outcome after a carotid revascularization procedure: an external validation study |
| title_sort | prediction models for clinical outcome after a carotid revascularization procedure an external validation study |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT volkersej predictionmodelsforclinicaloutcomeafteracarotidrevascularizationprocedureanexternalvalidationstudy AT algraa predictionmodelsforclinicaloutcomeafteracarotidrevascularizationprocedureanexternalvalidationstudy AT kappellelj predictionmodelsforclinicaloutcomeafteracarotidrevascularizationprocedureanexternalvalidationstudy AT roubings predictionmodelsforclinicaloutcomeafteracarotidrevascularizationprocedureanexternalvalidationstudy AT janseno predictionmodelsforclinicaloutcomeafteracarotidrevascularizationprocedureanexternalvalidationstudy AT howardg predictionmodelsforclinicaloutcomeafteracarotidrevascularizationprocedureanexternalvalidationstudy AT hendriksej predictionmodelsforclinicaloutcomeafteracarotidrevascularizationprocedureanexternalvalidationstudy AT hallidayaw predictionmodelsforclinicaloutcomeafteracarotidrevascularizationprocedureanexternalvalidationstudy AT gregsonj predictionmodelsforclinicaloutcomeafteracarotidrevascularizationprocedureanexternalvalidationstudy AT fraedrichg predictionmodelsforclinicaloutcomeafteracarotidrevascularizationprocedureanexternalvalidationstudy AT ecksteinhh predictionmodelsforclinicaloutcomeafteracarotidrevascularizationprocedureanexternalvalidationstudy AT calvetd predictionmodelsforclinicaloutcomeafteracarotidrevascularizationprocedureanexternalvalidationstudy AT bulbuliar predictionmodelsforclinicaloutcomeafteracarotidrevascularizationprocedureanexternalvalidationstudy AT brownmm predictionmodelsforclinicaloutcomeafteracarotidrevascularizationprocedureanexternalvalidationstudy AT becqueminjp predictionmodelsforclinicaloutcomeafteracarotidrevascularizationprocedureanexternalvalidationstudy AT ringlebpa predictionmodelsforclinicaloutcomeafteracarotidrevascularizationprocedureanexternalvalidationstudy AT masjl predictionmodelsforclinicaloutcomeafteracarotidrevascularizationprocedureanexternalvalidationstudy AT bonatilh predictionmodelsforclinicaloutcomeafteracarotidrevascularizationprocedureanexternalvalidationstudy AT brotttg predictionmodelsforclinicaloutcomeafteracarotidrevascularizationprocedureanexternalvalidationstudy AT grevingjp predictionmodelsforclinicaloutcomeafteracarotidrevascularizationprocedureanexternalvalidationstudy |