The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Perioperative cardiac events in patients undergoing noncardiac surgery: a review of the magnitude of the problem, the pathophysiology of the events and methods to estimate and communicate risk
Open accessAbstract
This is the first of 2 articles evaluating cardiac events in patients undergoing noncardiac surgery. In this article, we review the magnitude of the problem, the pathophysiology of these events, approaches to risk assessment and communication of risk. The number of patients undergoing noncardiac surgery worldwide is growing, and annually 500,000 to 900,000 of these patients experience perioperative cardiac death, nonfatal myocardial infarction (MI) or nonfatal cardiac arrest. Although the evidence is limited, a substantial proportion of fatal perioperative MIs may not share the same pathophysiology as nonoperative MIs. A clearer understanding of the pathophysiology is needed to direct future research evaluating prophylactic, acute and long-term interventions. Researchers have developed tools to facilitate the estimation of perioperative cardiac risk. Studies suggest that the Lee index is the most accurate generic perioperative cardiac risk index. The limitations of the studies evaluating the ability of noninvasive cardiac tests to predict perioperative cardiac risk reveals considerable uncertainty as to the role of these popular tests. Similarly, there is uncertainty as to the predictive accuracy of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association algorithm for cardiac risk assessment. Patients are likely to benefit from improved estimation and communication of cardiac risk because the majority of noncardiac surgeries are elective and accurate risk estimation is important to allow informed patient and physician decision-making.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Clinical Prediction Rules: Applications and Methodological Standards
Wasson, J. H., Sox, H. C., Neff, R. K., & Goldman, L. (1985) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejm198509263131306 · Cited by 1,357
Self-citationUDELSMAN, R., NORTON, J. A., JELENICH, S. E., GOLDSTEIN, D. S., LINEHAN, W. M., LORIAUX, D. L., & CHROUSOS, G. P. (1987) · The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism · doi:10.1210/jcem-64-5-986 · Cited by 278
Cited by
The Japanese Society of Hypertension Guidelines for the Management of Hypertension (JSH 2019)
Umemura, S., Arima, H., Arima, S., Asayama, K., Dohi, Y., Hirooka, Y., Horio, T., Hoshide, S., Ikeda, S., Ishimitsu, T., et al. (2019) · Hypertension Research · doi:10.1038/s41440-019-0284-9 · Cited by 1,880
Griesdale, D. E. G., de Souza, R. J., van Dam, R. M., Heyland, D. K., Cook, D. J., Malhotra, A., Dhaliwal, R., Henderson, W. R., Chittock, D. R., Finfer, S., et al. (2009) · Canadian Medical Association Journal · doi:10.1503/cmaj.090206 · Cited by 1,096
Self-citationRoshanov, P. S., Rochwerg, B., Patel, A., Salehian, O., Duceppe, E., Belley-Côté, E. P., Guyatt, G. H., Sessler, D. I., Le Manach, Y., Borges, F. K., et al. (2017) · Anesthesiology · doi:10.1097/aln.0000000000001404 · Cited by 423
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Devereaux, P. J., Goldman, L., Cook, D. J., Gilbert, K., Leslie, K., & Guyatt, G. H.
- Venue
- Canadian Medical Association Journal
- Publisher
- CMA Joule Inc.
- Published
- 2005-09-12
- Volume
- 173
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 627-634
- ISSN
- 0820-3946 (ISSN-L)
- 1488-2329
- OpenAlex
- W1966968530
- Cited by
- 654
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 13.36
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Perioperative cardiac events in patients undergoing noncardiac surgery: a review of the magnitude of the problem, the pathophysiology of the events and methods to estimate and communicate risk. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1503/cmaj.050011
- The paper
- Devereaux, P. J., Goldman, L., Cook, D. J., Gilbert, K., Leslie, K., & Guyatt, G. H. (2005). Perioperative cardiac events in patients undergoing noncardiac surgery: a review of the magnitude of the problem, the pathophysiology of the events and methods to estimate and communicate risk. Canadian Medical Association Journal. https://doi.org/10.1503/cmaj.050011
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.