Dataset Information

Diagnosis of infection after cardiovascular surgery (DICS): a study protocol for developing and validating a prediction model in prospective observational study.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Postoperative infection (PI) is one of the main severe complications after cardiovascular surgery. Therefore, antibiotics are routinely used during the first 48 hours after cardiovascular surgery. However, there is no effective method for early diagnosis of infection after cardiovascular surgery, particularly, to determine whether postoperative patients need to prolong the use of antibiotics after the first 48 hours. In this study, we aim to develop and validate a diagnostic model to help identify whether a patient has been infected after surgery and guide the appropriate use of antibiotics.

Methods and analysis

In this prospective study, we will develop and validate a diagnostic model to determine whether the patient has a bacterial infection within 48 hours after cardiovascular surgery. Baseline data will be collected through the electronic medical record system. A total of 2700 participants will be recruited (n=2000 for development, n=700 for validation). The primary outcome of the study is the newly PI during the first 48 hours after cardiovascular surgery. Logistic regression penalised with elastic net regularisation will be used for model development and bootstrap and k-fold cross-validation aggregation will be performed for internal validation. The derived model will be also externally validated in patients who are continuously included in another time period (N=700). We will evaluate the calibration and differentiation performance of the model by Hosmer-Lemeshow good of fit test and the area under the curve, respectively. We will report sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value in the validation data-set, with a target of 80% sensitivity.

Ethics and dissemination

Ethical approval was obtained from Medical Ethics Committee of Affiliated Nanjing Drum Tower Hospital, Nanjing University Medical College (2020-249-01).

Trial registration number

Chinese Clinical Trial Register (www.chictr.org.cn, ChiCTR2000038762); Pre-results.

SUBMITTER: Zhang HT

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8458369 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundPreoperative risk prediction is important for guiding clinical decision-making and resource allocation. Clinicians frequently rely solely on their own clinical judgement for risk prediction rather than objective measures. We aimed to compare the accuracy of freely available objective surgical risk tools with subjective clinical assessment in predicting 30-day mortality.Methods and findingsWe conducted a prospective observational study in 274 hospitals in the United Kingdom (UK), Australia, and New Zealand. For 1 week in 2017, prospective risk, surgical, and outcome data were collected on all adults aged 18 years and over undergoing surgery requiring at least a 1-night stay in hospital. Recruitment bias was avoided through an ethical waiver to patient consent; a mixture of rural, urban, district, and university hospitals participated. We compared subjective assessment with 3 previously published, open-access objective risk tools for predicting 30-day mortality: the Portsmouth-Physiology and Operative Severity Score for the enUmeration of Mortality (P-POSSUM), Surgical Risk Scale (SRS), and Surgical Outcome Risk Tool (SORT). We then developed a logistic regression model combining subjective assessment and the best objective tool and compared its performance to each constituent method alone. We included 22,631 patients in the study: 52.8% were female, median age was 62 years (interquartile range [IQR] 46 to 73 years), median postoperative length of stay was 3 days (IQR 1 to 6), and inpatient 30-day mortality was 1.4%. Clinicians used subjective assessment alone in 88.7% of cases. All methods overpredicted risk, but visual inspection of plots showed the SORT to have the best calibration. The SORT demonstrated the best discrimination of the objective tools (SORT Area Under Receiver Operating Characteristic curve [AUROC] = 0.90, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.88-0.92; P-POSSUM = 0.89, 95% CI 0.88-0.91; SRS = 0.85, 95% CI 0.82-0.87). Subjective assessment demonstrated good discrimination (AUROC = 0.89, 95% CI: 0.86-0.91) that was not different from the SORT (p = 0.309). Combining subjective assessment and the SORT improved discrimination (bootstrap optimism-corrected AUROC = 0.92, 95% CI: 0.90-0.94) and demonstrated continuous Net Reclassification Improvement (NRI = 0.13, 95% CI: 0.06-0.20, p < 0.001) compared with subjective assessment alone. Decision-curve analysis (DCA) confirmed the superiority of the SORT over other previously published models, and the SORT-clinical judgement model again performed best overall. Our study is limited by the low mortality rate, by the lack of blinding in the 'subjective' risk assessments, and because we only compared the performance of clinical risk scores as opposed to other prediction tools such as exercise testing or frailty assessment.ConclusionsIn this study, we observed that the combination of subjective assessment with a parsimonious risk model improved perioperative risk estimation. This may be of value in helping clinicians allocate finite resources such as critical care and to support patient involvement in clinical decision-making.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Anastomotic leakage (AL) remains the most important complication following colorectal surgery, and is associated with high morbidity and mortality rates. Previous research has focused on identifying risk factors and potential biomarkers for AL, but the sensitivity of these tests remains poor. OBJECTIVE:This prospective multicenter observational study aims at combining multiple parameters to establish a diagnostic algorithm for colorectal AL. METHODS:This study aims to include 588 patients undergoing surgery for colorectal carcinoma. Patients will be eligible for inclusion when surgery includes the construction of a colorectal anastomosis. Patient characteristics will be collected upon consented inclusion, and buccal swabs, breath, stool, and blood samples will be obtained prior to surgery. These samples will allow for the collection of information regarding patients' inflammatory status, genetic predisposition, and intestinal microbiota. Additionally, breath and blood samples will be taken postoperatively and patients will be strictly observed during their in-hospital stay, and the period shortly thereafter. RESULTS:This study has been open for inclusion since August 2015. CONCLUSIONS:An estimated 8-10% of patients will develop AL following surgery, and they will be compared to non-leakage patients. The objectives of this study are twofold. The primary aim is to establish and validate a diagnostic algorithm for the pre-operative prediction of the risk of AL development using a combination of inflammatory, immune-related, and genetic parameters. Previously established risk factors and novel parameters will be incorporated into this algorithm, which will aid in the recognition of patients who are at risk for AL. Based on these results, recommendations can be made regarding the construction of an anastomosis or deviating stoma, and possible preventive strategies. Furthermore, we aim to develop a new algorithm for the post-operative diagnosis of AL at an earlier stage, which will positively reflect on short-term survival rates. TRIAL REGISTRATION:Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT02347735; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02347735 (archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6hm6rxCsA).

Project description:IntroductionCOVID-19 is commonly experienced as an acute illness, yet some people continue to have symptoms that persist for weeks, or months (commonly referred to as 'long-COVID'). It remains unclear which patients are at highest risk of developing long-COVID. In this protocol, we describe plans to develop a prediction model to identify individuals at risk of developing long-COVID.Methods and analysisWe will use the national Early Pandemic Evaluation and Enhanced Surveillance of COVID-19 (EAVE II) platform, a population-level linked dataset of routine electronic healthcare data from 5.4 million individuals in Scotland. We will identify potential indicators for long-COVID by identifying patterns in primary care data linked to information from out-of-hours general practitioner encounters, accident and emergency visits, hospital admissions, outpatient visits, medication prescribing/dispensing and mortality. We will investigate the potential indicators of long-COVID by performing a matched analysis between those with a positive reverse transcriptase PCR (RT-PCR) test for SARS-CoV-2 infection and two control groups: (1) individuals with at least one negative RT-PCR test and never tested positive; (2) the general population (everyone who did not test positive) of Scotland. Cluster analysis will then be used to determine the final definition of the outcome measure for long-COVID. We will then derive, internally and externally validate a prediction model to identify the epidemiological risk factors associated with long-COVID.Ethics and disseminationThe EAVE II study has obtained approvals from the Research Ethics Committee (reference: 12/SS/0201), and the Public Benefit and Privacy Panel for Health and Social Care (reference: 1920-0279). Study findings will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at conferences. Understanding the predictors for long-COVID and identifying the patient groups at greatest risk of persisting symptoms will inform future treatments and preventative strategies for long-COVID.

Project description:INTRODUCTION:Adverse neurocognitive outcomes are still an important cause of morbidity and mortality after cardiac surgery. The most common neurocognitive disorders after conventional cardiac surgery are postoperative cognitive dysfunction (POCD), stroke and delirium. Minimal invasive cardiac procedures have recently been introduced into practice. Endoscopic coronary artery bypass grafting (Endo-CABG) is a minimal invasive cardiac procedure based on the conventional CABG procedure. Neurocognitive outcome after minimal invasive cardiac surgery, including Endo-CABG, has never been studied. Therefore, the main objective of this study is to examine neurocognitive outcome after Endo-CABG. METHODS AND ANALYSIS:We will perform a prospective observational cohort study including 150 patients. Patients are categorised into three groups: (1) patients undergoing Endo-CABG, (2) patients undergoing a percutaneous coronary intervention and (3) a healthy volunteer group. All patients in the Endo-CABG group will be treated following a uniform, standardised protocol. To assess neurocognitive outcome after surgery, a battery of six neurocognitive tests will be administered at baseline and at 3-month follow-up. In the Endo-CABG group, a neurological examination will be performed at baseline and postoperatively and delirium will be scored at the intensive care unit. Quality of life (QOL), anxiety and depression will be assessed at baseline and at 3-month follow-up. Satisfaction with Endo-CABG will be assessed at 3-month follow-up. Primary endpoints are the incidence of POCD, stroke and delirium after Endo-CABG. Secondary endpoints are QOL after Endo-CABG, patient satisfaction with Endo-CABG and the incidence of anxiety and depression after Endo-CABG. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION:The neurological outcome after minimal invasive coronary artery surgery study has received approval of the Jessa Hospital ethics board. It is estimated that the trial will be executed from December 2016 to January 2018, including enrolment and follow-up. Analysis of data, followed by publication of the results, is expected in 2018. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER:NCT02979782.

Project description:ObjectivesThis study aimed to examine the prevalence of frailty coding within the Dr Foster Global Comparators (GC) international database. We then aimed to develop and validate a risk prediction model, based on frailty syndromes, for key outcomes using the GC data set.DesignA retrospective cohort analysis of data from patients over 75 years of age from the GC international administrative data. A risk prediction model was developed from the initial analysis based on seven frailty syndrome groups and their relationship to outcome metrics. A weighting was then created for each syndrome group and summated to create the Dr Foster Global Frailty Score. Performance of the score for predictive capacity was compared with an established prognostic comorbidity model (Elixhauser) and tested on another administrative database Hospital Episode Statistics (2011-2015), for external validation.Setting34 hospitals from nine countries across Europe, Australia, the UK and USA.ResultsOf 6.7 million patient records in the GC database, 1.4 million (20%) were from patients aged 75 years or more. There was marked variation in coding of frailty syndromes between countries and hospitals. Frailty syndromes were coded in 2% to 24% of patient spells. Falls and fractures was the most common syndrome coded (24%). The Dr Foster Global Frailty Score was significantly associated with in-hospital mortality, 30-day non-elective readmission and long length of hospital stay. The score had significant predictive capacity beyond that of other known predictors of poor outcome in older persons, such as comorbidity and chronological age. The score's predictive capacity was higher in the elective group compared with non-elective, and may reflect improved performance in lower acuity states.ConclusionsFrailty syndromes can be coded in international secondary care administrative data sets. The Dr Foster Global Frailty Score significantly predicts key outcomes. This methodology may be feasibly utilised for case-mix adjustment for older persons internationally.