• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

利用决策曲线分析提高手术风险计算器的临床应用。

Leveraging Decision Curve Analysis to Improve Clinical Application of Surgical Risk Calculators.

机构信息

Department of Surgery, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.

Department of Surgery, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.

出版信息

J Surg Res. 2021 May;261:58-66. doi: 10.1016/j.jss.2020.11.059. Epub 2021 Jan 5.

DOI:10.1016/j.jss.2020.11.059
PMID:33418322
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8991373/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Surgical risk calculators (SRCs) have been developed for estimation of postoperative complications but do not directly inform decision-making. Decision curve analysis (DCA) is a method for evaluating prediction models, measuring their utility in guiding decisions. We aimed to analyze the utility of SRCs to guide both preoperative and postoperative management of patients undergoing hepatopancreaticobiliary surgery by using DCA.

METHODS

A single-institution, retrospective review of patients undergoing hepatopancreaticobiliary operations between 2015 and 2017 was performed. Estimation of postoperative complications was conducted using the American College of Surgeons SRC [ACS-SRC] and the Predictive OpTimal Trees in Emergency Surgery Risk (POTTER) calculator; risks were compared with observed outcomes. DCA was used to model optimal patient selection for risk prevention strategies and to compare the relative performance of the ACS-SRC and POTTER calculators.

RESULTS

A total of 994 patients were included in the analysis. C-statistics for the ACS-SRC prediction of 12 postoperative complications ranged from 0.546 to 0.782. DCA revealed that an ACS-SRC-guided readmission prevention intervention, when compared with an all-or-none approach, yielded a superior net benefit for patients with estimated risk between 5% and 20%. Comparison of SRCs for venous thromboembolism intervention demonstrated superiority of the ACS-SRC for thresholds for intervention between 2% and 4% with the POTTER calculator performing superiorly between 4% and 8% estimated risk.

CONCLUSIONS

SRCs can be used not only to predict complication risk but also to guide risk prevention strategies. This methodology should be incorporated into external validations of future risk calculators and can be applied for institution-specific quality improvement initiatives to improve patient outcomes.

摘要

背景

外科风险计算器(SRC)已被开发用于估计术后并发症,但不能直接为决策提供信息。决策曲线分析(DCA)是一种评估预测模型的方法,用于衡量其在指导决策方面的效用。我们旨在通过 DCA 分析 SRC 指导肝胰胆手术患者术前和术后管理的效用。

方法

对 2015 年至 2017 年期间行肝胰胆手术的患者进行了单中心回顾性研究。使用美国外科医师学院 SRC [ACS-SRC] 和预测最优树在急诊手术风险(POTTER)计算器评估术后并发症的估计风险,并将风险与观察到的结果进行比较。DCA 用于模拟针对风险预防策略的最佳患者选择,并比较 ACS-SRC 和 POTTER 计算器的相对性能。

结果

共纳入 994 例患者进行分析。ACS-SRC 预测 12 种术后并发症的 C 统计量范围为 0.546 至 0.782。DCA 显示,与一刀切的方法相比,ACS-SRC 指导的再入院预防干预对估计风险在 5%至 20%之间的患者具有更好的净收益。对静脉血栓栓塞干预的 SRC 进行比较,发现 ACS-SRC 在干预阈值为 2%至 4%时表现出优越性,而 POTTER 计算器在估计风险为 4%至 8%时表现出优越性。

结论

SRC 不仅可用于预测并发症风险,还可指导风险预防策略。这种方法应纳入未来风险计算器的外部验证,并可应用于机构特定的质量改进计划,以改善患者结局。

相似文献

1
Leveraging Decision Curve Analysis to Improve Clinical Application of Surgical Risk Calculators.利用决策曲线分析提高手术风险计算器的临床应用。
J Surg Res. 2021 May;261:58-66. doi: 10.1016/j.jss.2020.11.059. Epub 2021 Jan 5.
2
Can the American College of Surgeons Risk Calculator Predict 30-day Complications After Spine Surgery?美国外科医师学院风险计算器能否预测脊柱手术后 30 天的并发症?
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2020 May 1;45(9):621-628. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000003340.
3
Surgical Risk Is Not Linear: Derivation and Validation of a Novel, User-friendly, and Machine-learning-based Predictive OpTimal Trees in Emergency Surgery Risk (POTTER) Calculator.手术风险并非线性:一种新的、用户友好的、基于机器学习的预测优化急诊手术风险的决策树(POTTER)计算器的推导和验证。
Ann Surg. 2018 Oct;268(4):574-583. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000002956.
4
Can the American College of Surgeons Risk Calculator Predict 30-Day Complications After Cervical Spine Surgery?美国外科医师学会风险计算器能否预测颈椎手术后的30天并发症?
Clin Spine Surg. 2019 Nov;32(9):357-362. doi: 10.1097/BSD.0000000000000890.
5
A comparison of the new, parsimonious tool Surgical Risk Preoperative Assessment System (SURPAS) to the American College of Surgeons (ACS) risk calculator in emergency surgery.新的、简约的手术风险术前评估系统(SURPAS)与美国外科医师学院(ACS)风险计算器在急诊手术中的比较。
Surgery. 2020 Dec;168(6):1152-1159. doi: 10.1016/j.surg.2020.07.029. Epub 2020 Sep 6.
6
Development and evaluation of the universal ACS NSQIP surgical risk calculator: a decision aid and informed consent tool for patients and surgeons.开发和评估通用 ACS NSQIP 手术风险计算器:为患者和外科医生提供的决策辅助和知情同意工具。
J Am Coll Surg. 2013 Nov;217(5):833-42.e1-3. doi: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2013.07.385. Epub 2013 Sep 18.
7
Assessing the utility of deep neural networks in predicting postoperative surgical complications: a retrospective study.评估深度学习神经网络在预测术后手术并发症中的效用:一项回顾性研究。
Lancet Digit Health. 2021 Aug;3(8):e471-e485. doi: 10.1016/S2589-7500(21)00084-4. Epub 2021 Jun 29.
8
Predictive performance of the American College of Surgeons universal risk calculator in neurosurgical patients.美国外科医师学院通用风险计算器在神经外科患者中的预测性能。
J Neurosurg. 2018 Mar;128(3):942-947. doi: 10.3171/2016.11.JNS161377. Epub 2017 Apr 28.
9
Estimating risk of adverse cardiac event after vascular surgery using currently available online calculators.利用现有的在线计算器评估血管手术后不良心脏事件的风险。
J Vasc Surg. 2018 Jan;67(1):272-278. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2017.06.105. Epub 2017 Oct 21.
10
Accuracy of Risk Estimation for Surgeons Versus Risk Calculators in Emergency General Surgery.外科医生和风险计算器在急诊普通外科中风险评估的准确性。
J Surg Res. 2022 Oct;278:57-63. doi: 10.1016/j.jss.2022.04.042. Epub 2022 May 17.

引用本文的文献

1
The combined use of serum Raman spectroscopy and D dimer testing for the early diagnosis of acute aortic dissection.血清拉曼光谱与D-二聚体检测联合用于急性主动脉夹层的早期诊断
Heliyon. 2024 Jun 5;10(12):e32474. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e32474. eCollection 2024 Jun 30.
2
CD45 erythroid progenitor cells promote lymph node metastasis in gastric cancer by inducing a hybrid epithelial/mesenchymal state in lymphatic endothelial cells.CD45 红细胞祖细胞通过诱导淋巴管内皮细胞的混合上皮/间充质状态促进胃癌淋巴结转移。
Gastric Cancer. 2023 Nov;26(6):918-933. doi: 10.1007/s10120-023-01425-x. Epub 2023 Sep 7.
3
Development and validation of a nomogram model for individualized prediction of hypertension risk in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

本文引用的文献

1
Prediction Models - Development, Evaluation, and Clinical Application.预测模型——开发、评估与临床应用。
N Engl J Med. 2020 Apr 23;382(17):1583-1586. doi: 10.1056/NEJMp2000589.
2
Surgical Risk Is Not Linear: Derivation and Validation of a Novel, User-friendly, and Machine-learning-based Predictive OpTimal Trees in Emergency Surgery Risk (POTTER) Calculator.手术风险并非线性:一种新的、用户友好的、基于机器学习的预测优化急诊手术风险的决策树(POTTER)计算器的推导和验证。
Ann Surg. 2018 Oct;268(4):574-583. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000002956.
3
Evaluating the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement project risk calculator: results from the U.S. Extrahepatic Biliary Malignancy Consortium.
开发和验证一种列线图模型,用于个体化预测 2 型糖尿病患者的高血压风险。
Sci Rep. 2023 Jan 23;13(1):1298. doi: 10.1038/s41598-023-28059-4.
4
Evaluating Discrimination of ACS-NSQIP Surgical Risk Calculator in Thyroidectomy Patients.评估 ACS-NSQIP 外科风险计算器在甲状腺切除术患者中的歧视程度。
J Surg Res. 2022 Mar;271:137-144. doi: 10.1016/j.jss.2021.10.016. Epub 2021 Dec 10.
评估美国外科医师学会国家外科质量改进项目风险计算器:来自美国肝外胆管恶性肿瘤联盟的结果。
HPB (Oxford). 2017 Dec;19(12):1104-1111. doi: 10.1016/j.hpb.2017.08.009. Epub 2017 Sep 7.
4
External validation of the breast reconstruction risk assessment calculator.乳房重建风险评估计算器的外部验证
J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2017 Jul;70(7):876-883. doi: 10.1016/j.bjps.2017.04.010. Epub 2017 Apr 23.
5
Predictive performance of the American College of Surgeons universal risk calculator in neurosurgical patients.美国外科医师学院通用风险计算器在神经外科患者中的预测性能。
J Neurosurg. 2018 Mar;128(3):942-947. doi: 10.3171/2016.11.JNS161377. Epub 2017 Apr 28.
6
An Examination of American College of Surgeons NSQIP Surgical Risk Calculator Accuracy.美国外科医师学院 NSQIP 手术风险计算器准确性的研究
J Am Coll Surg. 2017 May;224(5):787-795e1. doi: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2016.12.057. Epub 2017 Apr 4.
7
Comparison of observed to predicted outcomes using the ACS NSQIP risk calculator in patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy.使用美国外科医师学会国家外科质量改进计划(ACS NSQIP)风险计算器对接受胰十二指肠切除术患者的观察结果与预测结果进行比较。
J Surg Oncol. 2016 Aug;114(2):157-62. doi: 10.1002/jso.24276. Epub 2016 May 4.
8
Assessing the predictive accuracy of the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Project Surgical Risk Calculator in open ventral hernia repair.评估美国外科医师学会国家外科质量改进项目手术风险计算器在开放性腹疝修补术中的预测准确性。
Am J Surg. 2016 Aug;212(2):272-81. doi: 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2016.01.034. Epub 2016 May 4.
9
Evaluation and Enhancement of Calibration in the American College of Surgeons NSQIP Surgical Risk Calculator.美国外科医师学会国家外科质量改进计划(NSQIP)手术风险计算器校准的评估与改进
J Am Coll Surg. 2016 Aug;223(2):231-9. doi: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2016.03.040. Epub 2016 May 19.
10
Net benefit approaches to the evaluation of prediction models, molecular markers, and diagnostic tests.用于评估预测模型、分子标志物和诊断测试的净效益方法。
BMJ. 2016 Jan 25;352:i6. doi: 10.1136/bmj.i6.