Huisman Monique G, van Leeuwen Barbara L, Ugolini Giampaolo, Montroni Isacco, Spiliotis John, Stabilini Cesare, de'Liguori Carino Nicola, Farinella Eriberto, de Bock Geertruida H, Audisio Riccardo A
Department of Surgery, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Department of Surgery, S. Orsola Malphighi Hospital, Bologna, Italy.
PLoS One. 2014 Jan 24;9(1):e86863. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0086863. eCollection 2014.
To determine the predictive value of the "Timed Up & Go" (TUG), a validated assessment tool, on a prospective cohort study and to compare these findings to the ASA classification, an instrument commonly used for quantifying patients' physical status and anesthetic risk.
In the onco-geriatric surgical population it is important to identify patients at increased risk of adverse post-operative outcome to minimize the risk of over- and under-treatment and improve outcome in this population.
280 patients ≥70 years undergoing elective surgery for solid tumors were prospectively recruited. Primary endpoint was 30-day morbidity. Pre-operatively TUG was administered and ASA-classification was registered. Data were analyzed using multivariable logistic regression analyses to estimate odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (95%-CI). Absolute risks and area under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUC's) were calculated.
180 (64.3%) patients (median age: 76) underwent major surgery. 55 (20.1%) patients experienced major complications. 50.0% of patients with high TUG and 25.6% of patients with ASA≥3 experienced major complications (absolute risks). TUG and ASA were independent predictors of the occurrence of major complications (TUG:OR 3.43; 95%-CI = 1.14-10.35. ASA1 vs. 2:OR 5.91; 95%-CI = 0.93-37.77. ASA1 vs. 3&4:OR 12.77; 95%-CI = 1.84-88.74). AUCTUG was 0.64 (95%-CI = 0.55-0.73, p = 0.001) and AUCASA was 0.59 (95%-CI = 0.51-0.67, p = 0.04).
Twice as many onco-geriatric patients at risk of post-operative complications, who might benefit from pre-operative interventions, are identified using TUG than when using ASA.
在一项前瞻性队列研究中确定经过验证的评估工具“计时起立行走测试”(TUG)的预测价值,并将这些结果与美国麻醉医师协会(ASA)分级进行比较,ASA分级是一种常用于量化患者身体状况和麻醉风险的工具。
在老年肿瘤外科患者群体中,识别术后不良结局风险增加的患者非常重要,以尽量减少过度治疗和治疗不足的风险,并改善该群体的治疗效果。
前瞻性招募了280例年龄≥70岁的接受实体肿瘤择期手术的患者。主要终点是30天发病率。术前进行TUG测试并记录ASA分级。使用多变量逻辑回归分析来估计比值比(OR)和95%置信区间(95%-CI)。计算绝对风险和受试者工作特征曲线下面积(AUC)。
180例(64.3%)患者(中位年龄:76岁)接受了大手术。55例(20.1%)患者发生了严重并发症。TUG测试结果高的患者中有50.0%以及ASA分级≥3的患者中有25.6%发生了严重并发症(绝对风险)。TUG和ASA是严重并发症发生的独立预测因素(TUG:OR 3.43;95%-CI = 1.14 - 10.35。ASA1与ASA2相比:OR 5.91;95%-CI = 0.93 - 37.77。ASA1与ASA3&4相比:OR 12.77;95%-CI = 1.84 - 88.74)。TUG的AUC为0.64(95%-CI = 0.55 - 0.73,p = 0.001),ASA的AUC为0.59(95%-CI = 0.51 - 0.67,p = 0.04)。
与使用ASA分级相比,使用TUG测试能够识别出术后并发症风险较高且可能从术前干预中获益的老年肿瘤患者数量多出一倍。