
==== Front
Braz J Cardiovasc Surg
Braz J Cardiovasc Surg
rbccv
Brazilian Journal of Cardiovascular Surgery
0102-7638
1678-9741
Sociedade Brasileira de Cirurgia Cardiovascular

10.21470/1678-9741-2023-0282
00200
Original Article
Assessment of EuroSCORE II and STS Score Performance and the Impact of Surgical Urgency in Isolated Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery at a Referral Center in São Paulo, Brazil
http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7545-2683
Wolf Plínio José Whitaker MD 1conception or design of the work acquisition, analysis or interpretation of data for the work drafting the work or revising it critically for important intellectual content agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that issues related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved final approval of the version to be published
Amato Vivian Lerner MD, PhD 1conception or design of the work acquisition, analysis or interpretation of data for the work drafting the work or revising it critically for important intellectual content agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that issues related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved final approval of the version to be published
1 Department of Coronary Artery Disease, Instituto Dante Pazzanese de Cardiologia, São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil
Correspondence Address : Plínio José Whitaker Wolf https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7545-2683 Department of Coronary Artery Disease, Instituto Dante Pazzanese de Cardiologia Av. Dr. Dante Pazzanese, 500, Vila Mariana, São Paulo, SP, Brazil, Zip Code: 04012-909, E-mail: pjwwolf@hotmail.com
03 9 2024
Sep-Oct 2024
39 5 e2023028225 7 2023
01 11 2023
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Introduction

Risk prediction models, such as The Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) risk score and the European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation II (EuroSCORE II), are recommended for assessing operative mortality in coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). However, their performance is questionable in Brazil.

Objective

To assess the performance of the STS score and EuroSCORE II in isolated CABG at a Brazilian reference center.

Methods

Observationaland prospective study including 438 patients undergoing isolated CABG from May 2022-May 2023 at the Instituto Dante Pazzanese de Cardiologia. Observed mortality was compared with predicted mortality (STS score and EuroSCORE II) by discrimination (area under the curve [AUC]) and calibration (observed/expected ratio [O/E]) in the total sample and subgroups of stable coronary artery disease (CAD) and acute coronary syndrome (ACS).

Results

Observed mortality was 4.3% (n=19) and estimated at 1.21% and 2.74% by STS and EuroSCORE II, respectively. STS (AUC=0.646; 95% confidence interva [CI] 0.760-0.532) and EuroSCORE II (AUC=0.697; 95% CI 0.802-0.593) presented poor discrimination. Calibration was absent for the North American mode (P<0.05) and reasonable for the European model (O/E=1.59, P=0.056). In the subgroups, EuroSCORE II had AUC of 0.616 (95% CI 0.752-0.480) and 0.826 (95% CI 0.991-0.661), while STS had AUC of 0.467 (95% CI 0.622-0.312) and 0.855 (95% CI 1.0-0.706) in ACS and CAD patients, respectively, demonstrating good score performance in stable patients.

Conclusion

The predictive models did not perform optimally in the total sample, but the EuroSCORE was superior, especially in elective stable patients, where accuracy was satisfactory.

Heart Disease Risk Factors
Risk Assessment
Myocardia Revascularization
Coronary Disease
==== Body
pmcINTRODUCTION

Coronary artery disease (CAD) is the leading cause of death in Brazil[1], and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) is the treatment of choice for many patients with severe CAD, being the most frequent cardiac surgery in this country[2] and worldwide (55% of cardiac surgeries according to data from large centers)[3]. Due to its high prevalence and inherent risks, operative risk assessment is essential.

Risk prediction models, developed to estimate morbidity and mortality outcomes in cardiovascular surgeries, are widely used tools that offer significant assistance to health services, public policies, and medical management. In this context, we highlight two risk prediction models with recognized accuracy that are recommended by current international guidelines[4,5] and are intensively used in the medical community: The Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) risk score and the European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation II (EuroSCORE II).

The North American STS score model, created in the 1990s and last updated (2018) from a sample of 439,092 surgeries[6], takes into account 65 complex variables, assessing operative mortality, as well as eight morbidity-related outcomes[7]. Easier to manage (composed of 18 risk factors), the EuroSCORE II, developed in 2011 from 22,381 patients, assesses only operative mortality[8]. Both models have satisfactory performance in predicting mortality in the populations in which they were developed[6,7,8,9], but studies suggest superiority of the North American model[10,11].

However, they were developed and validated predominantly in a population with different characteristics from the Brazilian reality and other countries. In regard to isolated CABG, the mortality observed by the STS registries in 2019 was 2.2%[12], while in Brazil, between 2005 and 2007, it was 6.22%[2], confirming these inequalities.

In accordance with this rationale, a study conducted in Turkey in 2013 compared EuroSCORE II, EuroSCORE, and STS in isolated CABG, showing that the first score underestimated mortality, estimated at 1.7% and observed at 7.9%[13]. Also, in a retrospective Brazilian study published in 2020 evaluating risk scores within a sample of 5,222 cardiac surgeries, Mejía OAV et al.[14] observed a mortality (7.6%) much higher than the one estimated by the European (3.1%) and North American (1.0%) models.

It is evident, therefore, that the performance of a predictive model differs according to the population groups in which it is applied, making it necessary to assess its accuracy in the Brazilian population, characterized by specific clinical presentations, given the deep socioeconomic and cultural differences, as well as in the distribution and access to health services[15,16].

Thus, this study aims to assess the performance in predicting operative mortality of the two main risk models currently used and recommended, STS score and EuroSCORE II, regarding isolated myocardial revascularization surgeries, in a reference center in Brazil, the Instituto Dante Pazzanese de Cardiologia (IDPC).

METHODS

This is an observational, prospective, single-center study conducted by collecting data from patients undergoing isolated CABG at IDPC.

Data Selection

All of the variables used to calculate the risk of mortality by the risk models analyzed in this study, the STS score (65 variables) and EuroSCORE II (18 variables), were obtained prior to surgery, in order to subsequently estimate the operative risk of patients using the two models above mentioned17,19.

The outcome assessed was operative mortality, defined as death occurring during the surgical hospitalization (regardless of the length of hospital stay) or occurring within 30 days after the surgical procedure, if discharged from hospital before this period.

In addition to these data, educational level and glycated hemoglobin (variables not present in the scores) were collected, for further characterization of the study population.

Variable Definition

The definition of each variable selected and collected is aligned exactly with the recommendations of the EuroSCORE II[8] and STS score[19] predictor models.

Creatinine clearance was calculated using the Cockcroft-Gault formula (the same as in EuroSCORE II).

Among the data collected, the variables “Canadian Cardiovascular Society IV (CCS IV) angina”, “extracardiac arteriopathy“, “poor mobility”, “recent infarction”, and “critical preoperative state” are exclusive to the EuroSCORE II model, while “cerebrovascular disease”, “heart failure (HF)” and “immunosuppression” are specific to the STS score. The definition and classification of surgical urgency are similar in both scores and were adopted in this study (elective: performed in routine admissions and can be delayed without causing additional cardiac risk; urgency: patient was not electively admitted for the procedure, which must be performed in the same hospitalization; emergency: must occur before the start of the next working day; salvage: under cardiopulmonary resuscitation). However, “chronic lung disease” and “previous cardiac surgery” are variables present in both scores, but with different definitions. In this study, the specific definition of each variable was adopted for the calculation of the respective score, but for the description of the characteristics of the overall sample, “chronic lung disease” was defined according to EuroSCORE II (necessity of bronchodilator use) and “previous cardiac surgery” according to STS (any cardiac procedure, including percutaneous coronary intervention [PCI]).

Sample Selection/Casuistry

Patients selected for the sample and data collection were all those admitted to the IDPC with scheduled isolated CABG in the same hospitalization, regardless of clinical status, degree of urgency, or surgical indication. Patients undergoing isolated CABG from May 2022 to May 2023 were prospectively included. If there was another associated surgical procedure during the operation, the patient was excluded.

Statistical Analysis

Continuous variables were described by their means and standard deviations. Categorical variables were described using absolute and relative frequencies.

Initial comparisons of baseline characteristics were performed by Fisher’s exact tests (categorical variables) or Student’s t-tests (continuous variables).

The results concerning observed and predicted mortality by the risk models were analyzed to determine the performance of EuroSCORE II and STS score (predictive validation of the models), by calibration (assessed by the observed to predicted mortality ratio, with satisfactory calibration when P>0.05) and discrimination (assessed by the area under the curve [AUC] of the receiver operating characteristic [ROC] curve, being adequate when closer to 1.0 and absent if < 0.5) tests.

Calibration of models was also assessed within established risk ranges of predicted mortality (≤ 3%: low risk; from 3 to 6%: moderate risk; ≥ 6%: high risk) and in specific subgroups of stable CAD and acute coronary syndrome (ACS), which included unstable angina and acute myocardial infarction.

Results were expressed with 95% confidence intervals (CI).

Analyses were conducted using R software, version 4.2.1.

Ethical Considerations

The study complied with all required ethical principles and was approved by the IDPC Research Ethics Committee (Research Ethics Committee number: 5244; report number: 5.383.227; Certificate of Submission for Ethical Assessment: 57362122.7.0000.5462). Patients had access to a Free and Informed Consent Form, in accordance with the general data protection law and resolution 466/2012.

RESULTS

Baseline Characteristics of the Sample and Subgroups

The study included 438 patients who underwent isolated CABG in the one-year period evaluated. The mean age was 62 ± 8.2 years (17.6% were older than or aged 70 years), 26.5% were women, and 76.7% were Caucasian. Table 1 shows the baseline characteristics regarding the clinical background of the sample.

Table 1 Baseline clinical characteristics of the sample (n=438).

Variable	Total (n=438)	
Age, mean ± SD	62.0 ± 8.2	
Age ≥ 70 years	77/438 (17.6%)	
Sex, male	322/438 (73.5%)	
Ethnicity		
Caucasian	336/438 (76.7%)	
Brown	74/438 (16.9%)	
Black	28/438 (6.4%)	
Educational level		
Illiterate	13/265 (4.9%)	
Elementary school	83/265 (31.3%)	
Middle school	51/265 (19.2%)	
High school	88/265 (33.2%)	
University education	30/265 (11.3%)	
BMI (kg/m2)	27.9 ± 4.7 (n = 438)	
BSA (m2)	1.91 ± 1.15 (n = 434)	
SAH	395/438 (90.2%)	
DM	236/438 (53.9%)	
IDDM	138/438 (31.5%)	
Illicit drugs	6/438 (1.4%)	
Alcoholism		
No	412/438 (94.1%)	
Former alcoholic	15/438 (3.4%)	
Alcoholic	11/438 (2.5%)	
Smoking		
No	187/438 (42.6%)	
Yes	251/438 (57.3%)	
Former smoker	169/438 (38.5%)	
Current smoker	82/438 (18.7%)	
Extracardiac arteriopathy*	106/438 (24.2%)	
PAD	64/438 (14.6%)	
Cerebrovascular disease†	81/438 (18.5%)	
Previous stroke	24/430 (5.6%)	
Carotid disease (> 50%)		
Present	56/438 (12.7%)	
Unilateral	36/438 (8.2%)	
Bilateral	20/438 (4.6%)	
Poor mobility	18/438 (4.1%)	
Chronic lung disease	27/438 (6.2%)	
Immunocompromised	7/438 (1.6%)	
Family history of CAD	48/438 (11.0%)	
Prior PCI	55/438 (12.5%)	
BMI=body mass index; BSA=body surface area; CAD=coronary artery disease; DM=diabetes mellitus; IDDM=insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus; PAD=peripheral artery disease; PCI=percutaneous coronary intervention; SAH=systemic arterial hypertension; SD=standard deviation

* carotid stenosis, amputation, approach to aneurysm of the abdominal aorta or other arteries

† stroke, transient ischaemic attack, carotid stenosis, previous approach carotid stenosis

Table 2 correlates the baseline characteristics of hospitalization with the indication for CABG (stable CAD or ACS subgroups), showing a higher prevalence of surgical indication for patients with ACS compared with stable CAD (64.2% and 35.8%, respectively) and, therefore, urgent and emergency surgeries were the most frequent surgical statuses.

Table 2 Comparison of baseline characteristics (n=438) at admission (clinical, laboratory, echocardiographic, and anatomical) according to indication for coronary artery bypass grafting (stable coronary artery disease and acute coronary syndrome subgroups).

Variable	Stable CAD (n = 157)	ACS (n = 281)	Total	P-value*	
AMI < 90 days	0/157 (0.0%)	201/281 (71.5%)	201/438 (45.9%)	< 0.001	
Time since AMI (days)	146.5 ± 48.2 (n = 20)	30.0 ± 35.0 (n = 213)	40.0 ± 48.8 (n = 233)	< 0.001	
CCS IV angina	0/157 (0.0%)	49/281 (17.4%)	49/438 (11.2%)	< 0.001	
Coronary anatomy				0.861	
One-vessel disease	3/157 (1.9%)	3/281 (1.0%)	6/438 (1.3%)		
Two-vessel disease	15/157 (9.5%)	30/281 (10.6%)	45/438 (10.2%)		
Three-vessel disease	94/157 (59.8%)	157/281 (55.8%)	251/438 (57.3%)		
LMD > 50%	45/157 (28.7%)	91/281 (32.4%)	136/438 (31.1%)	0.452	
Heart failure	41/157 (26.1%)	113/281 (40.2%)	154/438 (35.1%)	0.006	
Ejection fraction (%)	54.3 ± 10.3 (n = 157)	49.8 ± 12.0 (n = 281)	51.4 ± 11.7 (n = 438)	< 0.001	
Ejection fraction					
< 30%	5/157 (3.2%)	14/281 (5.0%)	19/438 (4.3%)	0.003	
30 - 50%	37/157 (23.6%)	107/281 (38.1%)	144/438 (32.9%)		
≥ 50%	115/157 (73.2%)	160/281 (56.9%)	275/438 (62.8%)		
NYHA functional class					
1	23/142 (16.2%)	41/219 (18.7%)	64/361 (17.7%)	< 0.001	
2	86/142 (60.6%)	71/219 (32.4%)	157/361 (43.5%)		
3	32/142 (22.5%)	89/219 (40.6%)	121/361 (33.5%)		
4	1/142 (0.7%)	18/219 (8.2%)	19/361 (5.3%)		
Pulmonary hypertension†	44/157 (28.0%)	96/281 (34.2%)	140/438 (32.0%)	0.201	
PASP > 55 mmHg	3/28 (10.7%)	4/70 (5.7%)	7/98 (7.1%)	0.404	
Critical preoperative state‡	1/157 (0.6%)	9/281 (3.2%)	10/438 (2.3%)	0.104	
Urgency of operation					
Elective	145/157 (92.4%)	2/281 (0.7%)	147/438 (33.6%)	< 0.001	
Emergency	0/157 (0.0%)	8/281 (2.8%)	8/438 (1.8%)		
Urgent	12/157 (7.6%)	271/281 (96.4%)	283/438 (64.6%)		
Complementary exams					
Haematocrit (%)	41.4 ± 5.0	39.3 ± 5.6	40.0 ± 5.4	< 0.001	
Leukocytes (1000/mm3)	7605.2 ± 2087.5	7952.7 ± 2183.9	7828.2 ± 2153.9	0.101	
Platelet count (1000/mm3)	196461.5 ± 50302.4	217622.8 ± 67127.9	210068.6 ± 62421.4	< 0.001	
Glycated haemoglobin (%)	6.82 ± 1.87	6.83 ± 1.74	6.83 ± 1.79	0.975	
Serum creatinine (mg/dL)	1.04 ± 0.38	1.03 ± 0.45	1.04 ± 0.42	0.908	
Clearance (mlVm¡n)§	84.7 ± 29.6	84.9 ± 29.8	84.8 ± 29.7	0.923	
Haemodialysis	1/157 (0.6%)	4/281 (1.4%)	5/438 (1.1%)	0.659	
ACS=acute coronary syndrome; AMI=acute myocardial infarction; CAD=coronary artery disease; CCS=Canadian Cardiovascular Society; LMD=left main disease; NYHA=New York Heart Association; PASP=pulmonary artery systolic pressure

* Fisher’s exact test for categorical variables, presented as n/N (%), and Student’s t-tests for continuous variables, represented as mean and standard deviation

† Pulmonary hypertension defined by PASP > 30 mmHg

‡ Preoperative critical state: intra-aortic balloon, anuria/oliguria, inotropic, cardiopulmonary arrest, and preoperative invasive ventilation

§ Calculated by the Cockcroft-Gault formula

Outcome and Performance Assessment of Predictor Models

The observed operative mortality was 4.3% (19 patients). All deaths occurred during hospitalization (no outcome occurred after discharge, within 30 days). Estimated operative mortality was 2.74% and 1.21% according to the EuroSCORE II and STS score models, respectively.

Tables 3 4 demonstrate the calibration of EuroSCORE II and STS, respectively, by analyzing the observed/expected ratio (O/E), which is optimal when closer to 1.0 and positive when the P-value is > 0.05.

Table 3 EuroSCORE II calibration in the total sample, in the subgroups according to the indication for myocardial revascularization (stable coronary artery disease and acute coronary syndrome) and according to the risk ranges.

Group	Observed mortality	Predicted mortality (%)	Observed/expected ratio	P-value	
Total (n=438)	19/438 (4.3%)	2.74	1.59	0.056	
Diagnosis					
Stable CAD (n=157)	5/157 (3.2%)	1.83	1.74	0.140	
ACS (n=281)	14/281 (5.0%)	3.24	1.54	0.331	
Risk ranges					
< 3.00%	10/333 (3.0%)	1.51	1.99		
3.00 – 6.00%	7/71 (9.9%)	4.1	2.41		
≥ 6.00%	2/34 (5.9%)	11.9	0.49		
ACS=acute coronary syndrome; CAD=coronary artery disease; EuroSCORE II = European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation II P-value for test of adherence of observed mortality to predicted mortality

P-value for test of adherence of observed mortality to predicted mortality

Table 4 Calibration of the Society of Thoracic Surgeons score in the total sample, in subgroups according to the indication for coronary artery bypass grafting (stable coronary artery disease and acute coronary syndrome) and according to risk ranges.

Group	Observed mortality	Predicted mortality (%)	Observed/expected ratio	P-value	
Total (n=438)	19/438 (4.3%)	1.21	3.60	< 0.001	
Diagnosis					
Stable CAD (n=157)	5/157 (3.2%)	0.871	3.66	< 0.001	
ACS (n=281)	14/281 (5.0%)	1.39	3.58	0.007	
Risk ranges					
< 3.00%	19/416 (4.6%)	1.03	4.45		
3.00 – 6.00%	0/18 (0%)	3.95	-		
≥ 6.00%	0/4 (0%)	7.5	-		
ACS=acute coronary syndrome; CAD=coronary artery disease

P-value for test of adherence of observed mortality to predicted mortality

Calibration was assessed in the specific subgroups of stable CAD and ACS, whose observed mortalities in the study population were 3.2% and 5.0%, respectively.

Table 3 reveals that, despite not being ideal (O/E=1.59), the calibration of the European score was positive in the analyzed sample (P>0.05). When assessing the calibration in the subgroups of CAD and ACS patients, it remained positive (with P-values higher than the calibration of the total sample), however, when assessing its performance according to risk ranges, there is a loss of calibration at high risks (> 6%), with a predicted mortality of 11.9% and an observed death of 5.9%.

Table 4, in turn, elucidates an absent calibration of the STS score in this sample, with a P-value < 0.001 and an O/E > 3.5 in all subgroups evaluated, including stable CAD and ACS and all established risk ranges, which makes its European competitor superior in this regard.

Discrimination was assessed both in the total sample and in the stable CAD and ACS subgroups using the ROC curve, as illustrated in (Figures 1, 2, 3).

Fig. 1 Receiver operating characteristic curve for mortality according to the European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation II (EuroSCORE II) and the Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) score for assessment of discrimination capacity in the total sample (n=438). AUC=area under the curve; CI=contidence interval.

Fig. 2 Receiver operating characteristic curve for mortality according to the European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation II (EuroSCORE II) and the Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) score for assessment of discrimination capacity in the subgroup of patients admitted with acute coronary syndrome (n=281). AUC=area under the curve; CI=confidence interval.

Fig. 3 Receiver operating characteristic curve for mortality according to the European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation II (EuroSCORE II) and the Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) score for assessment of discrimination capacity in the subgroup of patients admitted with stable coronary artery disease (n=157). AUC=area under the curve; CI=confidence interval.

Figure 1 demonstrates the area under the ROC curve in the total sample and reveals positive discrimination (AUC > 0.5) for the STS score (AUC=0.646; 95% CI 0.760-0.532) and EuroSCORE II (AUC=0.697; 95% CI 0.802-0.593); however, due to AUC values < 0.75, poor discrimination is observed.

Nevertheless, while discrimination of the models was very limited in the subgroup of patients admitted due to ACS, as shown in Figure 2 (AUC=0.616 and AUC=0.467 for EuroSCORE II and STS score, respectively), discrimination in patients with stable CAD was highly positive. In this subgroup of individuals with stable CAD, the AUC was > 0.8 for the European model (AUC=0.826; 95% CI 0.991-0.661) and for the North American model (AUC=0.855; 95% CI 1.0-0.706), as illustrated in Figure 3.

DISCUSSION

Analysis of the Observed Operative Mortality Outcome

This is an important prospective study to assess the performance of risk prediction models that are most recommended by current guidelines in a large cardiac surgery referral center in Brazil.

The operative mortality in the analyzed center (4.3%), which is part of the Brazilian public health system (Sistema Único de Saúde [SUS]), proved to be lower than that reported by other previous studies in Brazil, whose mortality for CABG is around 6.22%[2], ranging from 5% to 9.4% according to the center evaluated[20, 21]. In fact, there was evidence of a reduction in operative mortality in CABG in the service evaluated, since a previous retrospective analysis (1999-2017) showed a rate of 5%[22]. Even so, the mortality rate is still higher than the reported rates in developed countries, which are around 1.8 to 2.7%[11,23].

As the predictor models, EuroSCORE II and STS, were developed in databases of populations whose mortality is much lower than those of underdeveloped countries, there is a loss of accuracy of the scores when applied to other samples, as shown by previous studies[13], including in Brazilian centers[14,15,16]. However, in Brazil, the healthcare system is marked by inequality and heterogeneity and, hence, the performance of the two main predictor models at the IDPC was not known. This study, therefore, demonstrated that accuracy was poor for both predictor models (especially for the North American model) in this population as a whole.

Analysis of the Performance of Predictor Models (EuroSCORE II and STS Score)

The EuroSCORE II was found to be superior to the STS score, which is the opposite of what large studies describe[11] and what guidelines recommend[4,5]. While the European model has a positive calibration (O/E=1.59, with P>0.056), the North American score was uncalibrated (O/E=3.6, with P<0.001). Furthermore, the discrimination of the EuroSCORE II (AUC=0.697), although not ideal, is still better than of the STS score (AUC=646). This is probably due to the assessed tendency of the STS score to underestimate operative risk and, in a sample where mortality appears to be slightly higher, estimating a lower risk decreases its accuracy. Other studies have also shown that this model generally provides a lower estimated risk than the European concurrent[10,11,14].

There are numerous factors that may be related to the increase in operative mortality in the analyzed population with consequent loss of performance of the predictive models. Socioeconomic, cultural, and geographic factors may be associated, but it is not known objectively how these issues have led to increased mortality in this and other studies.

It is noted that most of the baseline characteristics of the patients in this study are similar to the variables of other populations found in developed countries, as shown in Table 5, composed by this study population (n=438), EuroSCORE II sample (n=22,381, recruited in 2010), a relevant study conducted in Italy by Paparella D et al.[24] (n=6,293, analyzed with data from the Puglia Adult Cardiac Surgery Registry from 2011 to 2012, which assessed the accuracy of EuroSCORE II in operative mortality), and STS analysis published in 2009 (n=774,881, evaluated from 2002 to 2006, in order to update and validate the STS score in that year)[8, 9]. Variables related to age, gender, renal function, peripheral arterial disease, and functional class were quite similar. Interestingly, however, the samples differed greatly in terms of surgical urgency. While in the EuroSCORE II, STS score, and Paparella D et al.[24] survey populations urgent/emergency surgery was indicated in 22.8%, 19.1%, and 50.3% respectively, our center included 66.4% of patients with urgent surgery. Also, the prevalence of recent infarction was more frequent in our sample, corresponding to 45.9% compared to 16.8% in the study conducted in Italy. In the three foreign analyses (EuroSCORE II, Paparella D et al.[24], and STS score 2009), the predictive models performed well (discrimination represented by AUC > 0.8), which was not the case in our study.

Table 5 Comparison of baseline characteristics of this study (n=438) with the sample of EuroSCORE II (n=22,381), Paparella et al. (n=6,293), and the STS published in 2009 (n=774,881).

Variable	Frequency or mean in IDPC sample (n=438)	Frequency or mean in the EuroSCORE II sample (n=22,381)*	Frequency or mean in the STS 2009 sample (n=774,881)†	Frequency or mean in Paparella et al. sample (n=6293)‡	
Age, mean ± SD (years)	62.0 ± 8.2	64.6 ± 12.5	NR	67.4 ± 11.2	
Sex, female	26.4%	30.9%	27.7%	34.1%	
Serum creatinine (mg/dL)	1.04 ± 0.42	1.04 ± 0.42	NR	NR	
Clearance (mL/min)	84.8 ± 29.7	83.6 ± 50.9	NR	76.3 ± 31.5	
Haemodialysis	1.1%	1.1%	1.6%	1.4%	
BMI (kg/m2)	27.9 ± 4.7	27.4 ± 4.8	NR	27.5 ± 4.4	
PAD	14.6%	NR	15.5%	NR	
Chronic lung disease	6.2%	10.7%	21%	9.2%	
IDDM	31.5%	7.6%	10.89%	10%	
NYHA functional class					
I	17.7%	NR	12.6%	25.2%	
II	43.5%	NR	24.2%	37.1%	
III	33.5%	NR	37.1%	34.8%	
IV	5.3%	NR	21.3%	5.6%	
CCS IV angina	11.2%	NR	NR	5.6%	
AMI < 90 days	45.9%	NR	NR	16.8%	
Ejection fraction (%)	51.4 ± 11.7	NR	NR	NR	
< 30%	4.3%	NR	NR	5.4%	
30-50%	32.9%	NR	NR	42.9%	
> 50%	62.8%	NR	NR	56.4%	
Pulmonary hypertension	32%	NR	NR	18.2%	
PASP > 55 mmHg	7.1%	NR	NR	4.7%	
Urgency of operation					
Elective	33.6%	76.7%	49.1%	80.6%	
Urgent/emergency	66.4%	22.8%	50.3%	19.1%	
Isolated CABG	100%	46.7%	100%	42%	
Observed mortality rate	4.3%	4.15%	2.3%	4.85%	
EuroSCORE II (AUC)§	2.74% (0.697)	3.9% (0.809)	NR	4.4% (0.830)	
STS score (AUC)§	1.21% (0.646)	NR	NR (0.812)	NR	
AMI=acute myocardial infarction; AUC=area under the curve; BMI=body mass index; CABG=coronary artery bypass grafting; CCS=Canadian Cardiovascular Society; EuroSCORE II=European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation II; IDDM=insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus; IDPC=Instituto Dante Pazzanese de Cardiologia; NYHA=New York Heart Association; PAD=peripheral artery disease; PASP=pulmonary artery systolic pressure; NR=not reported; SD=standard deviation; STS=Society of Thoracic Surgeons

Pulmonary hypertension defined when PASP > 30 mmHg

Creatinine clearance calculated according to the Cockroft-Gault formula

* Sample from the study that developed and validated EuroSCORE II

† STS sample published in 2009 to update and validate the STS score that year

‡ Paparella et al. sample with data collected from the Puglia Adult Cardiac Surgery Registry

§ Discrimination of the predictor model by AUC

In this sense, it is realized that the fact that our service performs a large part of urgent/emergency surgeries may be associated with an increment in mortality and discrepancy in the prediction of risk models. This reflects Brazilian socioeconomic inequalities, which do not provide comprehensive primary care, leading to an increase in the prevalence of underdiagnosed and untreated comorbidities, prompting patients to request health services at an advanced stage of the disease, such as urgent cases of ACS.

Thus, it is evident that patients arriving with an indication for urgent surgery for an ACS are at higher risk. In the study, 73% of deaths occurred in patients admitted for ACS (an indication for urgent surgery), representing a mortality rate of 5% in this subgroup, in contrast to a mortality rate of 3.2% in patients with stable CAD. In addition to the pathophysiological mechanisms related to ACS (prothrombotic, inflammatory state, edema, and myocardial stunning), previous decompensated comorbidities diagnosed in an unplanned hospitalization contribute to a worse outcome. This is reflected in a high admission rate of diabetic patients (54% vs. 25% in EuroSCORE II), insulin-dependent diabetics (31.5% vs. 7.6% in EuroSCORE II)[8], with pulmonary hypertension (32% vs. 18% in a study by Paparella D et al.[24]), showing a deficient primary care. Also, it can be observed that patients admitted in ACS have a higher prevalence of clinical criteria of severity, conferring higher operative mortality, as identified in Table 2. It is statistically significant (P<0.05) that ACS patients, compared with the chronic stable disease subgroup, are more often in CCS IV angina (17.4% vs. 0%), with worse New York Heart Association functional class (48.8% in class III/IV vs. 23.3%), lower ejection fraction (49.8% vs. 54.3%), and with HF (40.2% vs. 26.1%). In other words, in addition to conferring greater risk on its own, ACS is associated with other poor prognostic factors.

Because our service sample differs greatly from the populations that developed the predictor models regarding the prevalence of urgency and ACS, the performance of EuroSCORE II and STS score was evaluated in the subgroup of patients admitted only for stable CAD. In this case, a very good discrimination was observed for both models, reaching AUC > 0.8 (Figure 3), very similar to the values found in the studies in which they were validated™ The calibration of EuroSCORE II also proved to be adequate in this subgroup, with P=0.14.

On the other hand, when discrimination was assessed only in ACS patients (Figure 2), both scores were inadequate (AUC < 0.5). Thus, the high prevalence of ACS and the consequent surgical urgency contributed to increased mortality and inadequate scores performance in our service.

Therefore, it is feasible to state that, in view of the need to perform surgical risk in the center evaluated, EuroSCORE II is the most indicated score in our institution, since it has better calibration and discrimination. However, as previously stated, its performance is much better in patients with stable CAD (excellent discrimination and satisfactory calibration) and, in this population, the use of the European model seems to be reliable.

Analysis of Other Sample Characteristics

The complexity of the coronary disease in the sample is particularly noteworthy, as 88.4% of patients undergoing CABG had three-vessel or severe left main lesions. This profile is similar to other databases, as shown by Shahian et al.[9], in STS data published in 2009, where there were 75.7% and 28% of patients in the sample undergoing CABG with triple vessel disease and severe left main lesion, respectively. In our sample, few patients had one-vessel disease (1.3%), as well as in the mentioned STS analysis (4.17%), suggesting the likely greater indication for clinical treatment or PCI in this group of patients, leaving mainly those with more severe and complex disease for surgical revascularization.

Another important aspect demonstrated in this study is the reflection of the profile of patients using the public health system, since the center studied is an integral part of the SUS. It is observed that patients have a low educational level, with only 44.5% of individuals having completed high school, in addition to an illiteracy rate of 5%, in one of the most developed regions in Brazil. In parallel to educational access, the significant prevalence of comorbidities also reflects, as previously mentioned, socioeconomic difficulties in this population. Therefore, the research revealed a prominent prevalence of systemic arterial hypertension (90.2%), diabetes mellitus (53.9%), and an elevated body mass index (close to 28), comorbidities that are closely associated with a sedentary lifestyle, inadequate diet, and poor access to primary care, among other factors. For comparison, Shahian et al.[9], in their data, showed rates of 78.3% and 36.4% for hypertension and diabetes, respectively, that is, diseases that are slightly less frequent in a sample with better socioeconomic indices.

Limitations

The research had some limitations, particularly with regard to the small sample size, which may have an unfavorable impact on statistical power.

Finally, the evidence from this study that there is a notable prevalence of coronary urgent admissions suggests that it is only one but important factor contributing to the higher mortality and loss of performance of risk prediction models in the Brazilian population. Further studies are needed to confirm this hypothesis and also to search for other factors in our population and health services that may objectively justify the higher operative risk. After all, attributing, in a widespread and exclusive way, the socioeconomic aspect as the only etiology for a worse surgical outcome is comfortable and does not foster solutions for improvements in this context.

CONCLUSION

The study showed that the main recommended risk prediction models (EuroSCORE II and STS score) did not perform optimally in the assessment of operative mortality of isolated CABG in the population of the IDPC, due to the tendency to underestimate the operative risk in the total sample evaluated. However, EuroSCORE II proved to be superior to the STS score, especially in patients admitted electively with stable CAD, where the model proved to be accurate.

Abbreviations, Acronyms & Symbols

ACS Acute coronary syndrome

AMI Acute myocardial infarction

AUC Area under the curve

BMI Body mass index

BSA Body surface area

CABG Coronary artery bypass grafting

CAD Coronary artery disease

CCS Canadian Cardiovascular Society

CI Confidence interval

DM Diabetes mellitus

EuroSCORE II European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation II

HF Heart failure

IDDM Insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus

IDPC Instituto Dante Pazzanese de Cardiologia

LMD Left main disease

NR Not reported

NYHA New York Heart Association

O/E Observed/expected ratio

PAD Peripheral artery disease

PASP Pulmonary artery systolic pressure

PCI Percutaneous coronary intervention

ROC Receiver operating characteristic

SAH Systemic arterial hypertension

SD Standard deviation

STS Society of Thoracic Surgeons

SUS Sistema Único de Saúde

This study was carried out at the Department of Coronary Artery Disease, Instituto Dante Pazzanese de Cardiologia, São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.

No financial support.

No conflict of interest.
==== Refs
REFERENCES

1 Marinho F Prognosis of coronary artery disease in public hospitals in Brazil: the ERICO study and the application of knowledge in public health Arq Bras Cardiol 2021 117 5 986 987 10.36660/abc.20210825 34817007
2 Piegas LS Bittar OJ Haddad N Myocardial revascularization surgery (MRS): results from national health system (SUS) Arq Bras Cardiol 2009 93 5 555 560 10.1590/s0066-782x2009001100018 Erratum in: Arq Bras Cardiol. 2010;95(2):279. 20084319
3 Bowdish ME D’Agostino RS Thourani VH Desai N Shahian DM Fernandez FG The society of thoracic surgeons adult cardiac surgery database: 2020 update on outcomes and research Ann Thorac Surg 2020 109 6 1646 1655 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2020.03.003 32247780
4 Neumann FJ Sousa-Uva M ‘Ten commandments’ for the 2018 ESC/EACTS guidelines on myocardial revascularization Eur Heart J 2019 40 2 79 80 10.1093/eurheartj/ehy855 30615155
5 Lawton JS Tamis-Holland JE Bangalore S Bates ER Beckie TM Bischoff JM 2021 ACC/AHA/SCAI guideline for coronary artery revascularization: executive summary: a report of the American college of cardiology/American heart association joint committee on clinical practice guidelines Circulation 2022 145 3 e4 e17 10.1161/CIR.0000000000001039 Erratum in: Circulation. 2022;145(11):e771. doi:10.1161/CIR.0000000000001061. 34882436
6 Shahian DM Jacobs JP Badhwar V Kurlansky PA Furnary AP Cleveland JC Jr The society of thoracic surgeons 2018 adult cardiac surgery risk models: part 1-background, design considerations, and model development Ann Thorac Surg 2018 105 5 1411 1418 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2018.03.002 29577925
7 O’Brien SM Feng L He X Xian Y Jacobs JP Badhwar V The society of thoracic surgeons 2018 adult cardiac surgery risk models: part 2-statistical methods and results Ann Thorac Surg 2018 105 5 1419 1428 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2018.03.003 29577924
8 Nashef SA Roques F Sharples LD Nilsson J Smith C Goldstone AR EuroSCORE II Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2012 41 4 734 744 discussion 744-5. doi:10.1093/ejcts/ezs043. 22378855
9 Shahian DM O’Brien SM Filardo G Ferraris VA Haan CK Rich JB The society of thoracic surgeons 2008 cardiac surgery risk models: part 1--coronary artery bypass grafting surgery Ann Thorac Surg 2009 88 1 Suppl S2 22 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2009.05.053 19559822
10 Ad N Holmes SD Patel J Pritchard G Shuman DJ Halpin L Comparison of EuroSCORE II, original EuroSCORE, and the society of thoracic surgeons risk score in cardiac surgery patients Ann Thorac Surg 2016 102 2 573 579 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2016.01.105 27112651
11 Osnabrugge RL Speir AM Head SJ Fonner CE Fonner E Kappetein AP Performance of EuroSCORE II in a large US database: implications for transcatheter aortic valve implantation Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2014 46 3 400 408 10.1093/ejcts/ezu033 discussion 408. 24574449
12 D’Agostino RS Jacobs JP Badhwar V Fernandez FG Paone G Wormuth DW The society of thoracic surgeons adult cardiac surgery database: 2019 update on outcomes and quality Ann Thorac Surg 2019 107 1 24 32 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2018.10.004 30423335
13 Kunt AG Kurtcephe M Hidiroglu M Cetin L Kucuker A Bakuy V Comparison of original EuroSCORE, EuroSCORE II and STS risk models in a Turkish cardiac surgical cohort Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg 2013 16 5 625 629 10.1093/icvts/ivt022 23403767
14 Mejia OAV Borgomoni GB Zubelli JP Dallan LRP Pomerantzeff PMA Oliveira MAP Validation and quality measurements for STS, EuroSCORE II and a regional risk model in Brazilian patients PLoS One 2020 15 9 e0238737 e0238737 10.1371/journal.pone.0238737 32911513
15 Mejía OA Lisboa LA Puig LB Moreira LF Dallan LA Pomerantzeff PM InsCor: a simple and accurate method for risk assessment in heart surgery Arq Bras Cardiol 2013 100 3 246 254 10.5935/abc.20130043 23598578
16 Lisboa LA Mejia OA Moreira LF Dallan LA Pomerantzeff PM Dallan LR EuroSCORE II and the importance of a local model, InsCor and the future SP-SCORE Rev Bras Cir Cardiovasc 2014 29 1 1 8 10.5935/1678-9741.20140004 24896156
17 The Society of Thoracic Surgeons/ STS Short-Term Operative risk calculator: adult cardiac surgery database - all procedures [Internet] Chicago (IL) The Society Thoracic Surgery c 2024 [cited 2023 Jul 2]. Available from: https://riskcalc.sts.org/stswebriskcalc/calculate
18 EuroScore EuroSCORE II calculator [Internet] Cambridge (UK) EuroScore [cited 2023 Jul 2]. Available from: https://euroscore.org/index.php?id=17&lang=en
19 STS SCA Data Specifications v2.9 [Internet] Data Collection Forms fields. [cited 2024 Jul 23; updatade Aug 2019]. Available from: https://www.sts.org/sites/default/files/content/ACSD_Training%20Manual_V2-9%20Aug2019.pdf
20 Campagnucci VP Pinto E Silva AM Pereira WL Chamlian EG Gandra SM Rivetti LA EuroSCORE and the patients undergoing coronary bypass surgery at Santa Casa de São Paulo Rev Bras Cir Cardiovasc 2008 23 2 262 267 10.1590/s0102-76382008000200017 18820791
21 Menezes F Moreira LB Callegaro CC Comparação de escores de predição de mortalidade em pacientes submetidos a cirurgia cardíaca Saúde (Santa Maria) 2021 47 1 10.5902/2236583461984
22 Rosan RP Farsky PS França JÍD Amato VL Preoperative risk score and in-hospital death following isolated myocardial revascularization surgery Research, Society and Development 2022 11 2 e34211225828 e34211225828 10.33448/rsd-v11i2.25828
23 Kim KM Arghami A Habib R Daneshmand MA Parsons N Elhalabi Z The society of thoracic surgeons adult cardiac surgery database: 2022 update on outcomes and research Ann Thorac Surg 2023 115 3 566 574 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2022.12.033 36623634
24 Paparella D Guida P Di Eusanio G Caparrotti S Gregorini R Cassese M Risk stratification for in-hospital mortality after cardiac surgery: external validation of EuroSCORE II in a prospective regional registry Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2014 46 5 840 848 10.1093/ejcts/ezt657 24482382
