EuroSCORE II versus additive and logistic EuroSCORE in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention

Abstract

The aim of the present study was to externally validate the European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation (EuroSCORE) II (ESII) in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and to compare its performance with that of its previously released versions, named additive (addES) and logistic EuroSCORE (logES). A total of 537 patients undergoing PCI were analyzed by different measurements of discrimination, calibration, and global accuracy. A significant gradient in all-cause mortality was seen with all the models at 30 days, 1 year, and 5 years, with the exception of the ESII at 30 days. The ESII had the lowest area under the receiver operating characteristic curve at all time points compared with its previous version, being 0.83 (vs 0.90 for both addES and logES) at 30 days, 0.75 (vs 0.82 for both addES and logES) at 1 year, and 0.69 (vs 0.77 for addES and 0.76 for logES) at 5 years. However, the ESII displayed a better calibration than the logES at 30 days, whereas both scores were miscalibrated at 1 and 5 years. The Brier score displayed similar global accuracy between the ESII and logES. In conclusion, the ESII is better calibrated than the logES at 30 days but does not represent a step forward in discrimination and global accuracy compared with its previous versions for predicting early- and long-term mortality of patients undergoing PCI.