Long‐Term Post‐CABG Survival: Performance of Clinical Risk Models Versus Actuarial Predictions
Abstract
Background/aim
Clinical risk models are commonly used to predict short‐term coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) mortality but are less commonly used to predict long‐term mortality. The added value of long‐term mortality clinical risk models over traditional actuarial models has not been evaluated. To address this, the predictive performance of a long‐term clinical risk model was compared with that of an actuarial model to identify the clinical variable(s) most responsible for any differences observed.
Methods
Long‐term mortality for 1028 CABG patients was estimated using the Hannan New York State clinical risk model and an actuarial model (based on age, gender, and race/ethnicity). Vital status was assessed using the Social Security Death Index. Observed/expected (O/E) ratios were calculated, and the models’ predictive performances were compared using a nested c‐index approach. Linear regression analyses identified the subgroup of risk factors driving the differences observed.
Results
Mortality rates were 3%, 9%, and 17% at one‐, three‐, and five years, respectively (median follow‐up: five years). The clinical risk model provided more accurate predictions. Greater divergence between model estimates occurred with increasing long‐term mortality risk, with baseline renal dysfunction identified as a particularly important driver of these differences.
Conclusions
Long‐term mortality clinical risk models provide enhanced predictive power compared to actuarial models. Using the Hannan risk model, a patient’s long‐term mortality risk can be accurately assessed and subgroups of higher‐risk patients can be identified for enhanced follow‐up care. More research appears warranted to refine long‐term CABG clinical risk models. doi: 10.1111/jocs.12665