Long-Term Post-CABG Survival: Performance of Clinical Risk Models Versus Actuarial Predictions

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