Suppr超能文献

[腹部伤口裂开风险模型的验证]

[Validation of abdominal wound dehiscence's risk model].

作者信息

Gómez Díaz Carlos Javier, Rebasa Cladera Pere, Navarro Soto Salvador, Hidalgo Rosas José Manuel, Luna Aufroy Alexis, Montmany Vioque Sandra, Corredera Cantarín Constanza

机构信息

Servicio de Cirugía General y del Aparato Digestivo, Corporación Sanitaria y Universitaria Parc Taulí , Sabadell, Barcelona, España.

Servicio de Cirugía General y del Aparato Digestivo, Corporación Sanitaria y Universitaria Parc Taulí , Sabadell, Barcelona, España.

出版信息

Cir Esp. 2014 Feb;92(2):114-9. doi: 10.1016/j.ciresp.2012.12.008. Epub 2013 May 3.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this study is to determine the usefulness of the risk model developed by van Ramshorst et al., and a modification of the same, to predict the abdominal wound dehiscence's risk in patients who underwent midline laparotomy incisions.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Observational longitudinal retrospective study.

SAMPLE

Patients who underwent midline laparotomy incisions in the General and Digestive Surgery Department of the Sabadell's Hospital-Parc Taulí's Health and University Corporation-Barcelona, between January 1, 2010 and June 30, 2010. Dependent variable: Abdominal wound dehiscence.

INDEPENDENT VARIABLES

Global risk score, preoperative risk score (postoperative variables were excluded), global and preoperative probabilities of developing abdominal wound dehiscence.

SAMPLE

176 patients. Patients with abdominal wound dehiscence: 15 (8.5%). The global risk score of abdominal wound dehiscence group (mean: 4.97; IC 95%: 4.15-5.79) was better than the global risk score of No abdominal wound dehiscence group (mean: 3.41; IC 95%: 3.20-3.62). This difference is statistically significant (P<.001). The preoperative risk score of abdominal wound dehiscence group (mean: 3.27; IC 95%: 2.69-3.84) was better than the preoperative risk score of No abdominal wound dehiscence group (mean: 2.77; IC 95%: 2.64-2.89), also a statistically significant difference (P<.05). The global risk score (area under the ROC curve: 0.79) has better accuracy than the preoperative risk score (area under the ROC curve: 0.64).

CONCLUSION

The risk model developed by van Ramshorst et al. to predict the abdominal wound dehiscence's risk in the preoperative phase has a limited usefulness. Additional refinements in the preoperative risk score are needed to improve its accuracy.

摘要

引言

本研究旨在确定范·拉姆肖斯特等人开发的风险模型及其修改版对于预测接受中线剖腹手术切口患者腹部伤口裂开风险的有效性。

材料与方法

观察性纵向回顾性研究。

样本

2010年1月1日至2010年6月30日期间在萨巴德尔医院-帕尔·陶利健康与大学医院集团-巴塞罗那综合及消化外科接受中线剖腹手术切口的患者。因变量:腹部伤口裂开。

自变量

总体风险评分、术前风险评分(排除术后变量)、发生腹部伤口裂开的总体及术前概率。

样本

176例患者。腹部伤口裂开患者:15例(8.5%)。腹部伤口裂开组的总体风险评分(均值:4.97;95%置信区间:4.15 - 5.79)优于无腹部伤口裂开组的总体风险评分(均值:3.41;95%置信区间:3.20 - 3.62)。此差异具有统计学意义(P <.001)。腹部伤口裂开组的术前风险评分(均值:3.27;95%置信区间:2.69 - 3.84)优于无腹部伤口裂开组的术前风险评分(均值:2.77;95%置信区间:2.64 - 2.89),差异也具有统计学意义(P <.05)。总体风险评分(ROC曲线下面积:0.79)比术前风险评分(ROC曲线下面积:0.64)具有更高的准确性。

结论

范·拉姆肖斯特等人开发的用于预测术前腹部伤口裂开风险的风险模型有效性有限。需要对术前风险评分进行进一步优化以提高其准确性。

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