Sridharan Natalie D, Chaer Rabih A, Wu Bryan Boyuan, Eslami Mohammad H, Makaroun Michel S, Avgerinos Efthymios D
Division of Vascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, UPMC, Pittsburgh, PA.
Division of Vascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, UPMC, Pittsburgh, PA.
Ann Vasc Surg. 2018 Jan;46:97-103. doi: 10.1016/j.avsg.2017.06.150. Epub 2017 Jul 6.
There is increasing recognition that decreased reserve in multiple organ systems, known as accumulated deficits (AD), may better stratify perioperative risk than traditional risk indices. We hypothesized that an AD model would predict both perioperative adverse events and long-term survival after carotid endarterectomy (CEA), particularly important in asymptomatic patients.
Consecutive patients undergoing CEA between 1st January 2000 and 31st December 2010 were retrospectively identified. Seven of the deficit items from the Canadian Study of Health and Aging-frailty index (coronary disease, renal insufficiency, pulmonary disease, peripheral vascular disease, heart failure, hypertension, and diabetes) were tabulated for each patient. Predictors of perioperative and long-term outcomes were evaluated using regression analysis.
About 1,782 CEAs in 1,496 patients (mean age: 71.3 ± 9.3 years, 56.3% male, 35.4% symptomatic) were included. The risk of major adverse events (stroke, death, or myocardial infarction) at 30 days for patients with ≤3 deficits was 2.53% vs. 8.81% for patients with ≥4 deficits (P < 0.001). For patients with ≥5 deficits, the risk was 15.18%. Each additional deficit increased the odds of a 30-day major adverse event and hospital stay >2 days by 1.64 (P < 0.001) and 1.15 (P < 0.001), respectively. In multivariate analysis, the presence of ≥4 deficits was more predictive of perioperative major adverse events (odds ratio [OR] = 3.62, P < 0.001) than symptomatology within 6 months (OR = 1.57, P = 0.08) or octogenarian status (OR = 2.00, P = 0.02). Kaplan-Meier analysis showed significantly decreased survival over time with accumulating deficits (P < 0.001). Patients with ≥4 deficits have a hazards ratio for death of 2.6 compared to patients with ≤3 deficits (P < 0.001). Overall survival is estimated at 79.5% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.77-0.82) at 5 years in patients with ≤3 deficits versus 52.4% (95% CI: 0.46-0.58) in patients with ≥4 deficits, respectively. In subgroup analysis of asymptomatic patients, 5-year survival for octogenarian male patients with ≥4 deficits was only 26.8%. For asymptomatic males aged 70-79 years with ≥4 deficits, 5-year survival was 59.9%.
An AD model is more predictive of perioperative adverse events after CEA than age or symptomatic status. This model remains predictive of long-term survival. In asymptomatic male octogenarians with 4 or more AD, 5-year survival is severely limited.
人们越来越认识到,多器官系统储备功能下降,即所谓的累积缺陷(AD),可能比传统风险指数能更好地对围手术期风险进行分层。我们假设AD模型能够预测颈动脉内膜切除术(CEA)后的围手术期不良事件和长期生存率,这在无症状患者中尤为重要。
回顾性确定2000年1月1日至2010年12月31日期间连续接受CEA的患者。为每位患者列出加拿大健康与衰老衰弱指数中的7项缺陷项目(冠心病、肾功能不全、肺部疾病、外周血管疾病、心力衰竭、高血压和糖尿病)。使用回归分析评估围手术期和长期结局的预测因素。
纳入了1496例患者的约1782例CEA(平均年龄:71.3±9.3岁,56.3%为男性,35.4%有症状)。缺陷≤3项的患者30天时发生主要不良事件(中风、死亡或心肌梗死)的风险为2.53%,而缺陷≥4项的患者为8.81%(P<0.001)。对于缺陷≥5项的患者,风险为15.18%。每增加一项缺陷,30天主要不良事件的几率增加1.64(P<0.001),住院时间>2天的几率增加1.15(P<0.001)。在多变量分析中,与6个月内的症状(比值比[OR]=1.57,P=0.08)或八旬老人状态(OR=2.00,P=0.02)相比,≥4项缺陷更能预测围手术期主要不良事件(OR=3.62,P<0.001)。Kaplan-Meier分析显示,随着缺陷累积,生存率随时间显著下降(P<0.001)。与缺陷≤3项的患者相比,缺陷≥4项的患者死亡风险比为2.6(P<0.001)。缺陷≤3项的患者5年总体生存率估计为79.5%(95%置信区间[CI]:0.77-0.82),而缺陷≥4项的患者为52.4%(95%CI:0.46-0.58)。在无症状患者的亚组分析中,缺陷≥4项的八旬男性患者5年生存率仅为26.8%。对于70-79岁有≥4项缺陷的无症状男性,5年生存率为59.9%。
AD模型比年龄或症状状态更能预测CEA后的围手术期不良事件。该模型仍然能够预测长期生存率。在有4项或更多AD的无症状男性八旬老人中,5年生存率严重受限。