Wilkins S, Oliva K, Chowdhury E, Ruggiero B, Bennett A, Andrews E J, Dent O, Chapuis P, Platell C, Reid C M, McMurrick P J
Cabrini Monash University Department of Surgery, Malvern, Victoria.
Department of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria.
BJS Open. 2020 Sep 28;4(6):1208-16. doi: 10.1002/bjs5.50356.
Postoperative mortality after colorectal cancer surgery varies across hospitals and countries. The aim of this study was to test the Association of Coloproctologists of Great Britain and Ireland (ACPGBI) models as predictors of 30-day mortality in an Australian cohort.
Data from patients who underwent surgery in six hospitals between 1996 and 2015 (CRC data set) were reviewed to test ACPGBI models, and patients from 79 hospitals in the Bi-National Colorectal Cancer Audit between 2007 and 2016 (BCCA data set) were analysed to validate model performance. Recalibrated models based on ACPGBI risk models were developed, tested and validated on a data set of Australasian patients.
Of 18 752 patients observed during the study, 6727 (CRC data set) and 3814 (BCCA data set) were analysed. The 30-day mortality rate was 1·1 and 3·5 per cent in the CRC and BCCA data sets respectively. Both the original and revised ACPGBI models overestimated 30-day mortality for the CRC data set (observed to expected (O/E) ratio 0·17 and 0·21 respectively). Their ability to correctly predict mortality risk was poor (P < 0·001, Hosmer-Lemeshow test); however, the area under the curve for both models was 0·88 (95 per cent c.i. 0·85 to 0·92) showing good discriminatory power to classify 30-day mortality. The recalibrated original model performed well for calibration and discrimination, whereas the recalibrated revised model performed well for discrimination but not for calibration. Risk prediction was good for both recalibrated models. On external validation using the BCCA data set, the recalibrated models underestimated mortality risk (O/E ratio 3·06 and 2·98 respectively), whereas both original and revised ACPGBI models overestimated the risk (O/E ratio 0·48 and 0·69). All models showed similar good discrimination.
The original and revised ACPGBI models overpredicted risk of 30-day mortality. The new Australasian calibrated ACPGBI model needs to be tested further in clinical practice.
结直肠癌手术后的术后死亡率在不同医院和国家有所不同。本研究的目的是检验英国和爱尔兰结直肠外科医师协会(ACPGBI)模型作为澳大利亚队列中30天死亡率预测指标的效果。
回顾了1996年至2015年间在六家医院接受手术患者的数据(结直肠癌数据集)以检验ACPGBI模型,并分析了2007年至2016年间双边结直肠癌审计中79家医院患者的数据(BCCA数据集)以验证模型性能。基于ACPGBI风险模型开发了重新校准的模型,并在一组澳大利亚患者数据上进行了测试和验证。
在研究期间观察的18752例患者中,分析了6727例(结直肠癌数据集)和3814例(BCCA数据集)。结直肠癌数据集和BCCA数据集中30天死亡率分别为1.1%和3.5%。原始和修订后的ACPGBI模型均高估了结直肠癌数据集的30天死亡率(观察与预期(O/E)比分别为0.17和0.21)。它们正确预测死亡风险的能力较差(P<0.001,Hosmer-Lemeshow检验);然而,两个模型的曲线下面积均为0.88(95%置信区间0.85至0.92),显示出对30天死亡率进行分类的良好区分能力。重新校准的原始模型在校准和区分方面表现良好,而重新校准的修订模型在区分方面表现良好,但在校准方面表现不佳。两个重新校准的模型风险预测效果都很好。使用BCCA数据集进行外部验证时,重新校准的模型低估了死亡风险(O/E比分别为3.06和2.98),而原始和修订后的ACPGBI模型均高估了风险(O/E比分别为0.48和0.69)。所有模型均显示出相似的良好区分能力。
原始和修订后的ACPGBI模型高估了30天死亡率风险。新的澳大利亚校准的ACPGBI模型需要在临床实践中进一步测试。