HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Personal Folders Download to citation manager Author home page(s): Gary L. Grunkemeier Permission Requests Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Grunkemeier, G. L. Articles by Wu, Y. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Grunkemeier, G. L. Articles by Wu, Y. Related Collections Education Related Article

J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2001;122:216-219
© 2001 The American Association for Thoracic Surgery

Statistics for the Rest of Us (STATS)

Interpretation of nonfatal events after cardiac surgery: Actual versus actuarial reporting

From the Providence Health System, Portland, Ore.

Presented at The American Association for Thoracic Surgery Symposium on Adult Cardiac Surgery, May 6, 2001, San Diego, Calif.

Received for publication April 30, 2001. Accepted for publication May 21, 2001. Address for reprints: Gary Grunkemeier, PhD, 9155 SW Barnes, #33, Portland, OR 97225 (E-mail: ggrunkemeier{at}providence.org).

Abstract

Objective: To describe the cumulative incidence (actual) method of analysis and to contrast it with the Kaplan-Meier method.
Method: We use data on porcine valve replacement to illustrate these two statistical techniques.
Results: The "actual" analysis estimates the percentage of events expected to occur. The percentage given by the Kaplan-Meier method is much larger.
Conclusion: Actual (cumulative incidence) analysis is preferred for estimating the probability of occurrence of a nonfatal time-related event.

Related Article

Statistics for the rest of us

Andrew S. Wechsler
J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg. 2001 122: 207-208. [Extract] [Full Text] [PDF]

This article has been cited by other articles:

				M. W.A. van Geldorp, W.R. E. Jamieson, A. P. Kappetein, J. P.A. Puvimanasinghe, M. J.C. Eijkemans, G. L. Grunkemeier, J. J.M. Takkenberg, and A. J.J.C. Bogers Usefulness of microsimulation to translate valve performance into patient outcome: Patient prognosis after aortic valve replacement with the Carpentier Edwards supra-annular valve J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg., September 1, 2007; 134(3): 702 - 709. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. Kulik and M. Ruel Reply to Wu and Grunkemeier Eur. J. Cardiothorac. Surg., December 1, 2006; 30(6): 954 - 954. [Full Text] [PDF]

				Y. Wu and G. L. Grunkemeier What is the risk that I will have a major complication after my valve operation? Eur. J. Cardiothorac. Surg., December 1, 2006; 30(6): 953 - 954. [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. P.A. Puvimanasinghe, J. J.M. Takkenberg, M. J.C. Eijkemans, L. A. van Herwerden, W.R. E. Jamieson, G. L. Grunkemeier, J. D. F. Habbema, and A. J.J.C. Bogers Comparison of Carpentier-Edwards pericardial and supraannular bioprostheses in aortic valve replacement Eur. J. Cardiothorac. Surg., March 1, 2006; 29(3): 374 - 379. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				Pitfalls and limitations in measuring and interpreting the outcomes of mitral valve repair. J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg., March 1, 2006; 131(3): 523 - 529.

				J. P.A. Puvimanasinghe, J. J.M. Takkenberg, M. J.C. Eijkemans, E. W. Steyerberg, L. A. van Herwerden, G. L. Grunkemeier, J. D. F. Habbema, and A. J.J.C. Bogers Prognosis After Aortic Valve Replacement With the Carpentier-Edwards Pericardial Valve: Use of Microsimulation Ann. Thorac. Surg., September 1, 2005; 80(3): 825 - 831. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				P. J. Shah, K. Bui, S. Blackmore, I. Gordon, D. L. Hare, J. Fuller, S. Seevanayagam, and B. F. Buxton Has the in situ right internal thoracic artery been overlooked? An angiographic study of the radial artery, internal thoracic arteries and saphenous vein graft patencies in symptomatic patients Eur. J. Cardiothorac. Surg., May 1, 2005; 27(5): 870 - 875. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				O. Birim, A. P. Kappetein, J. J.M. Takkenberg, R. J. van Klaveren, and A. J.J.C. Bogers Survival After Pathological Stage IA Nonsmall Cell Lung Cancer: Tumor Size Matters Ann. Thorac. Surg., April 1, 2005; 79(4): 1137 - 1141. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J P A Puvimanasinghe, J J M Takkenberg, M B Edwards, M J C Eijkemans, E W Steyerberg, L A van Herwerden, K M Taylor, G L Grunkemeier, J D F Habbema, and A J J C Bogers Comparison of outcomes after aortic valve replacement with a mechanical valve or a bioprosthesis using microsimulation Heart, October 1, 2004; 90(10): 1172 - 1178. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				C. C. Miller III, E. E. Porat, A. L. Estrera, A. N. Vinnerkvist, T. T.T. Huynh, and H. J. Safi Analysis of short-term multivariate competing risks data following thoracic and thoracoabdominal aortic repair Eur. J. Cardiothorac. Surg., June 1, 2003; 23(6): 1023 - 1027. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. P.A. Puvimanasinghe, J. J.M. Takkenberg, M. J.C. Eijkemans, E. W. Steyerberg, L. A. van Herwerden, G. L. Grunkemeier, J. D. F. Habbema, and A. J.J.C. Bogers Choice of a mechanical valve or a bioprosthesis for AVR: does CABG matter? Eur. J. Cardiothorac. Surg., May 1, 2003; 23(5): 688 - 695. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J.B. Borman and C. De Riberolles Sorin BicarbonTM bileaflet valve: a 10-year experience Eur. J. Cardiothorac. Surg., January 1, 2003; 23(1): 86 - 92. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]