Ratshabedi Phuti Khomotso, Chikandiwa Admire, Mbodi Langanani
Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Faculty of Clinical Medicine, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.
J Coll Med S Afr. 2025 Aug 5;3(1):164. doi: 10.4102/jcmsa.v3i1.164. eCollection 2025.
Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a multifactorial disease. There are two main clinical entities that are associated with morbidity and mortality, deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism. Our study aimed to compare the three risk assessment models (RAMs), Khorana, Caprini and Padua in terms of predicting VTE in gynaecologic oncology patients.
Patients were retrospectively scored according to Caprini, Padua and Khorana scoring models to assess the risk for VTE. Accuracy analysis of risk assessment models was performed using sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values as well as the area under the curve of each model per patient.
The Caprini score has good sensitivity (80.0), a poor specificity (24.3), low positive predictive value (7.2) and good negative predictive value (94.3) (95% CI). The Khorana score has a poor sensitivity (30.0), a fair specificity (62.5), low positive predictive value (5.6) and good negative predictive value (92.4) (95% CI). The Padua score has an average sensitivity (60.0), a poor specificity (42.6), low positive predictive value (7.1) and good negative predictive value (93.5) (95% CI). The Caprini score had the overall best performance.
Caprini score performed better and proved to be the best score. It has the potential to reduce mortality associated with VTE in gynaecological cancer patients. However, the Caprini score needs to be tested in the same population in a prospective study in a multicentre.
The results of this study prove to us that Caprini score is the best to be used in a South African setting.
静脉血栓栓塞症(VTE)是一种多因素疾病。有两种主要的临床类型与发病率和死亡率相关,即深静脉血栓形成和肺栓塞。我们的研究旨在比较三种风险评估模型(RAMs),即科纳纳(Khorana)、卡普里尼(Caprini)和帕多瓦(Padua)模型在预测妇科肿瘤患者VTE方面的情况。
根据卡普里尼、帕多瓦和科纳纳评分模型对患者进行回顾性评分,以评估VTE风险。使用敏感性、特异性、阳性和阴性预测值以及每位患者各模型的曲线下面积进行风险评估模型的准确性分析。
卡普里尼评分具有良好的敏感性(80.0)、较差的特异性(24.3)、较低的阳性预测值(7.2)和良好的阴性预测值(94.3)(95%置信区间)。科纳纳评分具有较差的敏感性(30.0)、尚可的特异性(62.5)、较低的阳性预测值(5.6)和良好的阴性预测值(92.4)(95%置信区间)。帕多瓦评分具有中等敏感性(60.0)、较差的特异性(42.6)、较低的阳性预测值(7.1)和良好的阴性预测值(93.5)(95%置信区间)。卡普里尼评分总体表现最佳。
卡普里尼评分表现更好,被证明是最佳评分。它有可能降低妇科癌症患者中与VTE相关的死亡率。然而,卡普里尼评分需要在多中心的同一人群中进行前瞻性研究验证。
本研究结果向我们证明,卡普里尼评分在南非环境中是最适用的。