Suppr超能文献

用改良的衰弱指数和手术阿普加评分预测头颈部手术的结局。

Predicting outcomes in head and neck surgery with modified frailty index and surgical apgar scores.

机构信息

Department of Head and Neck, Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center.

Department of Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN.

出版信息

Oral Oncol. 2024 Dec;159:107045. doi: 10.1016/j.oraloncology.2024.107045. Epub 2024 Sep 26.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To compare the efficacy of the Modified Frailty Index and Modified Surgical Apgar scores in predicting postoperative outcomes in head and neck cancer patients.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed patients who underwent major head and neck surgery between 2012 and 2015. Modified Surgical Apgar, and Frailty Index, scores were calculated on 723 patients. The primary outcome was 30-day complication and/or mortality.

RESULTS

The mean Modified Frailty Index was 0.11 ± 0.12, and mean Modified Surgical Apgar score was 6.15 ± 1.67. Both scores were significantly associated with 30-day complication (P<0.05). The Modified Surgical Apgar score was superior to the Modified Frailty Index in predicting complications (Area Under the Curve (AUC) = 0.76; 95 % Confidence Interval (CI), 0.722-0.793; and AUC=0.59; 95 % CI, 0.548-0.633, respectively). Concurrent use of both scoring systems (AUC=0.77) was not superior to individual use. An increase in the mFI from 0.27 to 0.36 was associated with an increase in the risk of complication postoperatively (Odds Ratio (OR) = 3.67; 95 % CI, 1.30-10.34, P=.014). A reduction in the mSAS from 7 to 6 increased the risk of complication following surgery (OR=2.64; 95 % CI, 1.45-4.80; P=.002).

CONCLUSION

Both scores are useful in risk stratifying head and neck cancer patients. The Modified Surgical Apgar score was superior at predicting complications; concurrent use of both scores added minimal benefit.

摘要

目的

比较改良衰弱指数和改良手术 Apgar 评分在预测头颈部癌症患者术后结局中的疗效。

方法

我们回顾性分析了 2012 年至 2015 年间接受主要头颈部手术的患者。对 723 例患者进行了改良手术 Apgar 和衰弱指数评分。主要结局是 30 天并发症和/或死亡率。

结果

平均改良衰弱指数为 0.11±0.12,平均改良手术 Apgar 评分为 6.15±1.67。两个评分均与 30 天并发症显著相关(P<0.05)。改良手术 Apgar 评分在预测并发症方面优于改良衰弱指数(曲线下面积(AUC)=0.76;95%置信区间(CI),0.722-0.793;AUC=0.59;95%CI,0.548-0.633)。同时使用两种评分系统(AUC=0.77)并不优于单独使用。mFI 从 0.27 增加到 0.36 与术后并发症风险增加相关(优势比(OR)=3.67;95%CI,1.30-10.34,P=.014)。mSAS 从 7 减少到 6 增加了手术后发生并发症的风险(OR=2.64;95%CI,1.45-4.80;P=.002)。

结论

两种评分系统均有助于对头颈癌患者进行风险分层。改良手术 Apgar 评分在预测并发症方面更优;同时使用两种评分系统仅略有获益。

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