Objective: Three scores have been proposed to stratify the risk of mortality for each cardiac surgical procedure: The RACHS-1, the Aristotle Basic Complexity (ABC), and the STS-EACTS complexity scoring model. The aim was to compare the ability to predict mortality and morbidity of the three scores applied to a specific population.
Design: Retrospective, descriptive study.
Setting: Pediatric and neonatal intensive care units in a referral hospital.
Patients: Children under 18 years admitted to the intensive care unit after surgery.
Interventions: None.
Outcome measures: Demographic, clinical, and surgical data were assessed. Morbidity was considered as prolonged length of stay (LOS > 75 percentile), high respiratory (>72 hours of mechanical ventilation), and high hemodynamic support (inotropic support >20).
Results: One thousand and thirty-seven patients were included, in which 205 were newborns (18%). The category 2 was the most frequent in the three scores: In RACHS-1, ABC, 44.9%, and STS-EACTS, 40.8%. Newborns presented significant higher categories. Children required cardiopulmonary bypass in more occasions (P < .001) but the times of bypass and aortic cross-clamp were significantly higher in newborns (P < .001 and P = .016). Thirty-two patients died (2.8%). A quarter of patients had a prolonged LOS, 17%, a high respiratory support, and 7.1%, a high hemodynamic support. RACHS-1 (AUC 0.760) and STS-EACTS (AUC 0.763) were more powerful for predicting mortality and STS-EACTS for predicting prolonged LOS (AUC 0.733) and the need for high respiratory support (AUC 0.742).
Conclusions: STS-EACTS seems to stratify better risk of mortality, prolonged LOS, and need for respiratory support after surgery.
Keywords: cardiac surgery; congenital heart disease; hospital mortality; intensive care; morbidity; risk adjustment.
© 2019 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.