Critical appraisal and assessment of bias among studies evaluating risk prediction models for in-hospital and 30-day mortality after percutaneous coronary intervention: a systematic review

Abstract

Objective: We systematically assessed prediction models for the risk of in-hospital and 30-day mortality in post-percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) patients.

Design: Systematic review and narrative synthesis.

Data sources: Searched PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, CNKI, Wanfang Database, VIP Database and SinoMed for literature up to 31 August 2023.

Eligibility criteria: The included literature consists of studies in Chinese or English involving PCI patients aged ≥18 years. These studies aim to develop risk prediction models and include designs such as cohort studies, case-control studies, cross-sectional studies or randomised controlled trials. Each prediction model must contain at least two predictors. Exclusion criteria encompass models that include outcomes other than death post-PCI, literature lacking essential details on study design, model construction and statistical analysis, models based on virtual datasets, and publications such as conference abstracts, grey literature, informal publications, duplicate publications, dissertations, reviews or case reports. We also exclude studies focusing on the localisation applicability of the model or comparative effectiveness.

Data extraction and synthesis: Two independent teams of researchers developed standardised data extraction forms based on CHecklist for critical Appraisal and data extraction for systematic Reviews of prediction Modelling Studies to extract and cross-verify data. They used Prediction model Risk Of Bias Assessment Tool (PROBAST) to assess the risk of bias and applicability of the model development or validation studies included in this review.

Results: This review included 28 studies with 38 prediction models, showing area under the curve values ranging from 0.81 to 0.987. One study had an unclear risk of bias, while 27 studies had a high risk of bias, primarily in the area of statistical analysis. The models constructed in 25 studies lacked clinical applicability, with 21 of these studies including intraoperative or postoperative predictors.

Conclusion: The development of in-hospital and 30-day mortality prediction models for post-PCI patients is in its early stages. Emphasising clinical applicability and predictive stability is vital. Future research should follow PROBAST's low risk-of-bias guidelines, prioritising external validation for existing models to ensure reliable and widely applicable clinical predictions.

Prospero registration number: CRD42023477272.

Keywords: coronary intervention; mortality; nursing care; systematic review.