Suppr超能文献

择期开放性腹主动脉瘤手术后预测近期预后的风险评分方法比较

Comparison of risk-scoring methods in predicting the immediate outcome after elective open abdominal aortic aneurysm surgery.

作者信息

Tang T Y, Walsh S R, Fanshawe T R, Seppi V, Sadat U, Hayes P D, Varty K, Gaunt M E, Boyle J R

机构信息

Cambridge Vascular Unit, Cambridge University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, UK.

出版信息

Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2007 Nov;34(5):505-13. doi: 10.1016/j.ejvs.2007.07.019. Epub 2007 Sep 14.

Abstract

BACKGROUND & OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to apply three simple risk - scoring systems to prospectively collected data on all elective open Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm (AAA) operations in the Cambridge Academic Vascular Unit over a 6 - year period (January 1998 to January 2004), to compare their predictive values and to evaluate their validity with respect to prediction of mortality and post-operative complications.

METHODS

204 patients underwent elective open infra-renal AAA repair. Data were prospectively collected and risk assessment scores were calculated for mortality and morbidity according to the Glasgow Aneurysm Score (GAS), VBHOM (Vascular Biochemistry and Haematology Outcome Models) and Estimation of Physiologic Ability and Surgical Stress (E-PASS).

RESULTS

The mortality rate was 6.3% (13/204) and 59% (121/204) experienced a post-operative complication (30-day outcome). For GAS, VBHOM and E-PASS the receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curve analysis for prediction of in-hospital mortality showed area under the curve (AUC) of 0.84 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.76 to 0.92; p<0.0001), 0.82 (95% CI, 0.68 to 0.95; p=0.0001) and 0.92 (95% CI, 0.87 to 0.97; p<0.0001) respectively. There were also significant correlations between post-operative complications and length of hospital stay and each of the three scores, but the correlation was substantially higher in the case of E-PASS.

CONCLUSIONS

All three scoring systems accurately predicted the risk of mortality and morbidity in patients undergoing elective open AAA repair. Among these, E-PASS seemed to be the most accurate predictor in this patient population.

摘要

背景与目的

本研究旨在将三种简单的风险评分系统应用于前瞻性收集的剑桥学术血管科6年期间(1998年1月至2004年1月)所有择期开放性腹主动脉瘤(AAA)手术的数据,比较它们的预测价值,并评估其在预测死亡率和术后并发症方面的有效性。

方法

204例患者接受了择期开放性肾下腹主动脉瘤修复术。前瞻性收集数据,并根据格拉斯哥动脉瘤评分(GAS)、VBHOM(血管生物化学和血液学结果模型)以及生理能力和手术应激评估(E-PASS)计算死亡率和发病率的风险评估分数。

结果

死亡率为6.3%(13/204),59%(121/204)的患者出现术后并发症(30天结果)。对于GAS、VBHOM和E-PASS,预测院内死亡率的受试者工作特征(ROC)曲线分析显示曲线下面积(AUC)分别为0.84(95%置信区间[CI],0.76至0.92;p<0.0001)、0.82(95%CI,0.68至0.95;p=0.0001)和0.92(95%CI,0.87至0.97;p<0.0001)。术后并发症与住院时间以及三个分数中的每一个之间也存在显著相关性,但E-PASS的相关性明显更高。

结论

所有三种评分系统都准确预测了择期开放性AAA修复患者的死亡率和发病率风险。其中,E-PASS似乎是该患者群体中最准确的预测指标。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验