Suppr超能文献

食管癌切除术后死亡风险评分的验证

Validation of mortality risk scores after esophagectomy.

作者信息

Schiefer Sabine, Crnovrsanin Nerma, Rompen Ingmar F, Jorek Nicolas, Al-Saeedi Mohammed, Schmidt Thomas, Nienhüser Henrik, Sisic Leila

机构信息

Department of General, Visceral and Transplantation Surgery, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany.

Department of General, Visceral and Cancer Surgery, University Hospital of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.

出版信息

J Cancer Res Clin Oncol. 2025 Jan 28;151(2):51. doi: 10.1007/s00432-024-06074-w.

Abstract

PURPOSE

Oncological esophagectomy is the mainstay in esophageal cancer treatment, but perioperative mortality remains a significant concern. Various scoring systems exist to identify patients at high risk for postoperative complications and death. In the following, we aim to evaluate and compare these different scoring systems.

METHODS

We analyzed data from 714 patients who underwent esophagectomy between 2002 and 2021. Each patient's risk was calculated using three models: the International Esodata Study Group (IESG) 90-day mortality risk prediction, the Steyerberg 30-day mortality score, and the Fuchs et al. preoperative in-hospital mortality score (Fuchs score). The diagnostic performance of these models was assessed using the area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves.

RESULTS

Of the 714 patients, the majority (87.67%) underwent abdomino-thoracic esophagectomy with intrathoracic anastomosis. The IESG score classified 52.1% as very low, 26.6% low, 17.5% middle, 2.8% high, and 1% as very high risk, while the Fuchs score identified 94.5% as low-risk and 5.5% as high-risk patients. Mortality rates were 6.9% at 90 days, 3.4% at 30 days, and 6.7% in-hospital. The area under the ROC curve was 0.634 (95%CI: 0.557-0.712) for the IESG model, 0.637 (95%CI: 0.526-0.747) for the Steyerberg score, and 0.686 (95%CI: 0.611-0.760) for the Fuchs score.

CONCLUSIONS

Existing risk score systems provide a possibility for preoperative risk stratification, particularly for identifying high-risk patients. However, due to their limited predictive ability, improvements are needed to apply these strategies effectively in clinical practice.

摘要

目的

肿瘤性食管切除术是食管癌治疗的主要手段,但围手术期死亡率仍是一个重大问题。存在多种评分系统来识别术后并发症和死亡风险高的患者。在本文中,我们旨在评估和比较这些不同的评分系统。

方法

我们分析了2002年至2021年间接受食管切除术的714例患者的数据。使用三种模型计算每位患者的风险:国际食管数据研究组(IESG)90天死亡率风险预测模型、斯泰尔伯格30天死亡率评分模型和富克斯等人的术前院内死亡率评分模型(富克斯评分)。使用受试者操作特征(ROC)曲线下面积评估这些模型的诊断性能。

结果

在714例患者中,大多数(87.67%)接受了经胸腹部食管切除术并进行胸内吻合。IESG评分将52.1%的患者分类为极低风险,26.6%为低风险,17.5%为中等风险,2.8%为高风险,1%为极高风险,而富克斯评分将94.5%的患者识别为低风险患者,5.5%为高风险患者。90天死亡率为6.9%,30天死亡率为3.4%,院内死亡率为6.7%。IESG模型的ROC曲线下面积为0.634(95%CI:0.557 - 0.712),斯泰尔伯格评分的ROC曲线下面积为0.637(95%CI:0.526 - 0.747),富克斯评分的ROC曲线下面积为0.686(95%CI:0.611 - 0.760)。

结论

现有的风险评分系统为术前风险分层提供了可能性,特别是用于识别高风险患者。然而,由于其预测能力有限,需要改进以便在临床实践中有效应用这些策略。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/1705/11792931/2e9c00bd8d14/432_2024_6074_Fig1_HTML.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验