Atrial fibrillation prediction by surgical risk scores following isolated coronary artery bypass grafting surgery

8Citations
Citations of this article
14Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Objective: To compare surgical risk scores including Euroscore II, STS and Logistic Euroscore for their predictive ability about postoperative atrial fibrillation (POAF). Study Design: Prospective cohort study. Place and Duration of Study: Istanbul Yeni Yuzyil University, Gaziosmanpasa Hospital and Istanbul Mehmet Akif Ersoy Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery Center, from June to December 2018. Methodology: One hundred and four patients, undergoing isolated coronary artery bypass grafting operation, were enrolled. Surgical risk scores, clinical, laboratory and echocardiographic parameters were compared between POAF-positive and POAF-negative groups Results: Of the 104 patients included, 23 (22.1%) patients developed atrial fibrillation postoperatively. Peripheral artery disease, carotid artery disease, current smoking, cardiopulmonary bypass time, left atrial diameter, and Syntax II score were found to be associated with POAF. Among these, peripheral artery disease and cardiopulmonary bypass time were independently related with POAF. Euroscore II (p = 0.005), STS (p = 0.026) and Logistic Euroscore (p = 0.032) were all statistically higher in POAF developing patients. In terms of ROC analysis, area under the curve was higher in Euroscore II (0.697) than STS and Logistic Euroscore (0.658 and 0.652, respectively). Conclusion: Euroscore II, STS and Logistic Euroscore were all associated with POAF development. However, Euroscore II could be a better option for the prediction of POAF.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Dogan, A., Gunesdogdu, F., Sever, K., Kahraman, S., Mansuroglu, D., Yolcu, M., … Kurtoglu, N. (2019). Atrial fibrillation prediction by surgical risk scores following isolated coronary artery bypass grafting surgery. Journal of the College of Physicians and Surgeons Pakistan, 29(11), 1038–1042. https://doi.org/10.29271/jcpsp.2019.11.1038

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free