切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"

中华结直肠疾病电子杂志 ›› 2020, Vol. 09 ›› Issue (01) : 26 -29. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.2095-3224.2020.01.006

所属专题: 文献

论著

两种评分预测结直肠癌患者术后并发症风险的研究
邢学忠1,(), 王海军1, 曲世宁1, 黄初林1, 王浩1, 袁振南1, 张昊1, 杨全会1   
  1. 1. 100021 北京,国家癌症中心,国家肿瘤临床医学研究中心/中国医学科学院北京协和医学院肿瘤医院重症医学科
  • 收稿日期:2019-09-05 出版日期:2020-02-20
  • 通信作者: 邢学忠
  • 基金资助:
    中国医学科学院肿瘤医院管理研究课题(No. LC2017D06)

Performance of two prediction scores in predicting postoperative morbidities after colorectal surgery

Xuezhong Xing1,(), Haijun Wang1, Shining Qu1, Chulin Huang1, Hao Wang1, Zhennan Yuan1, Hao Zhang1, Quanhui Yang1   

  1. 1. Department of Intensvie Care Unit, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Science and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100021, China
  • Received:2019-09-05 Published:2020-02-20
  • Corresponding author: Xuezhong Xing
引用本文:

邢学忠, 王海军, 曲世宁, 黄初林, 王浩, 袁振南, 张昊, 杨全会. 两种评分预测结直肠癌患者术后并发症风险的研究[J/OL]. 中华结直肠疾病电子杂志, 2020, 09(01): 26-29.

Xuezhong Xing, Haijun Wang, Shining Qu, Chulin Huang, Hao Wang, Zhennan Yuan, Hao Zhang, Quanhui Yang. Performance of two prediction scores in predicting postoperative morbidities after colorectal surgery[J/OL]. Chinese Journal of Colorectal Diseases(Electronic Edition), 2020, 09(01): 26-29.

目的

探讨外科Apgar评分和结直肠-生理和手术危险度评分预测结直肠癌患者术后并发症风险的价值。

方法

回顾性分析2017年9月~2018年9月间中国医学科学院肿瘤医院重症医学科(ICU)收治的接受结直肠癌手术的患者资料。全组177例。回顾计算每例患者的外科Apgar评分(SAS)和结直肠-生理和手术危险度评分(CR-POSSUM)。根据患者术后是否发生并发症分为无并发症组和有并发症组。根据患者术后并发症的发生情况分为严重并发症组和无或轻微并发症组。严重并发症定义为Clavien-Dindo分级III级以上的并发症。

结果

单因素分析发现:术中SAS评分和CR-POSSUM评分均不能预测术后严重并发症的发生。单因素分析还发现:仅术中SAS评分可预测术后并发症的发生(χ2=6.127,P=0.013),而CR-POSSUM评分不能预测术后并发症发生。受试者工作曲线分析发现术中SAS评分预测患者结直肠癌术后发生并发症的AUROC为0.605±0.043[(95%可信区间:0.521~0.689),P=0.017]。取截尾值为9时,术中SAS评分预测患者结直肠术后发生严重并发症的敏感性58.8%和特异性60.0%。

结论

术中SAS评分与结直肠癌患者术后并发症的发生相关,但是预测能力中等,需要配合其他工具共同使用。

Objective

To investigate the value of two prediction scores in predicting postoperative morbidities after colorectal surgery.

Methods

Data of patients who underwent colorectal surgery between September 2017 and September 2018 were retrospectively collected and reviewed. There were 177 patients in total. Surgical Apgar Score (SAS) and colorectal physiological and operative severity score for the enumeration of mortality and morbidity(CR-POSSUM) were calculated for each patient. Patients were grouped as morbidity group and normal group. And patients were grouped as major complication group and no or minor complication group. Major complication was defined as complications grade 3 and upper according to the definition of Clavien-Dindo grading.

Results

Univariable analysis demonstrated that neither SAS nor CR-POSSUM was predictive of the occurrence of major complication. And Univariable analysis demonstrated that only SAS was predictive of the occurrence of postoperative complication (χ2=6.127, P=0.013), while CR-POSSUM was not. Receiver operation curve (ROC) demonstrated that area under the curve of intraoperative SAS in predicting the occurrence of complication after colorectal surgery was 0.605±0.043 (95% CI: 0.521~0.689, P=0.017). Sensitivity and specificity of SAS was 58.8% and 60.0% respectively in predicting the occurrence of complication when the cutoff was set as 9.

Conclusion

Intraoperative Surgical Apgar Score was predictive of the occurrence of complication after colorectal surgery with moderate discrimination. It should be in combination with other prediction tools.

表1 术后严重并发症发生的单因素分析
表2 术后并发症的单因素分析
图1 外科Apgar评分(SAS评分)预测结肠癌术后并发症风险的ROC曲线。P=0.017,AUROC=0.605±0.043(0.521~0.689),取截尾值为9分时,敏感性58.8%,特异性60.0%
[1]
Chen W, Zheng R, Baade PD, et al. Cancer statistics in China, 2015 [J]. CA Cancer J Clin, 2016, 66(2): 115-132.
[2]
Miller KD, Nogueira L, Mariotto AB, et al. Cancer treatment and survivorship statistics, 2019 [J]. CA Cancer J Clin, 2019, 69(5): 363-385.
[3]
Margonis GA, Amini N, Buettner S, et al. The prognostic impact of primary tumor site differs according to the KRAS mutational status: A study by the international genetic consortium for colorectal liver metastasis [J]. Ann Surg, 2019 Aug 5.
[4]
Tekkis PP, Poloniecki JD, Thompson MR, et al. Operative mortality in colorectal cancer: prospective national study [J]. BMJ, 2003, 327(7425): 1196-1201.
[5]
Tekkis PP, Prytherch DR, Kocher HM, et al. Development of a dedicated risk-adjustment scoring system for colorectal surgery (colorectal-POSSUM) [J]. Br J Surg, 2004, 91(9): 1174-1182.
[6]
Gawande AA, Kwaan MR, Regenbogen SE, et al. An apgar score for surgery [J]. J Am Coll Surg, 2007, 204: 201-208.
[7]
Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien PA. Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey [J]. Ann Surg, 2004, 240(2): 205-213.
[8]
Baré M, Alcantara MJ, Gil MJ, et al. Validity of the CR-POSSUM model in surgery for colorectal cancer in Spain (CCR-CARESS study) and comparison with other models to predict operative mortality [J]. BMC Health Serv Res, 2018,18(1): 49.
[9]
Regenbogen SE, Bordeianou L, Hutter MM, et al. The intraoperative surgical apgar score predicts postdischarge complications after colon and rectal resection [J]. Surgery, 2010, 148(3): 559-566.
[10]
Cihoric M, Toft Tengberg L, Bay-Nielsen M, et al. Prediction of outcome after emergency high-risk intra-abdominal surgery using the Surgical Apgar Score [J]. Anesth Analg, 2016, 123(6): 1516-1521.
[11]
Miller TE, Thacker JK, White WD, et al. Reduced length of hospital stay in colorectal surgery after implementation of an enhanced recovery protocol [J]. Anesth Analg, 2014, 118(5): 1052-1061.
[12]
Nelson G, Kiyang LN, Crumley ET, et al. Implementation of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) across a provincial healthcare system: The ERAS alberta colorectal surgery experience [J]. World J Surg, 2016, 40(5): 1092-1103.
[1] 李友, 唐林峰, 杜伟伟, 刘海亮, 余新水, 沈佳宇, 巨积辉. 皮瓣联合掌长肌腱折叠单排三点式固定治疗指背侧创面伴锤状指畸形的临床效果观察[J/OL]. 中华损伤与修复杂志(电子版), 2024, 19(06): 485-490.
[2] 李刘庆, 陈小翔, 吕成余. 全腹腔镜与腹腔镜辅助远端胃癌根治术治疗进展期胃癌的近中期随访比较[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 23-26.
[3] 刘世君, 马杰, 师鲁静. 胃癌完整系膜切除术+标准D2根治术治疗进展期胃癌的近中期随访研究[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 27-30.
[4] 赵丽霞, 王春霞, 陈一锋, 胡东平, 张维胜, 王涛, 张洪来. 内脏型肥胖对腹腔镜直肠癌根治术后早期并发症的影响[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 35-39.
[5] 李华志, 曹广, 刘殿刚, 张雅静. 不同入路下行肝切除术治疗原发性肝细胞癌的临床对比[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 52-55.
[6] 常小伟, 蔡瑜, 赵志勇, 张伟. 高强度聚焦超声消融术联合肝动脉化疗栓塞术治疗原发性肝细胞癌的效果及安全性分析[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 56-59.
[7] 徐逸男. 不同术式治疗梗阻性左半结直肠癌的疗效观察[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 72-75.
[8] 王露, 周丽君. 全腹腔镜下远端胃大部切除不同吻合方式对胃癌患者胃功能恢复、并发症发生率的影响[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 92-95.
[9] 孙莲, 马红萍, 吴文英. 局部进展期甲状腺癌患者外科处理[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 112-114.
[10] 刘柏隆, 周祥福. 女性尿失禁吊带手术并发症处理的经验分享[J/OL]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 127-127.
[11] 陈宗杰, 胡添松. 肝外伤破裂患者治疗后胆漏发生影响因素分析[J/OL]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2024, 13(06): 836-840.
[12] 刘卓, 张宗明, 张翀, 刘立民, 赵月, 齐晖. 腹腔镜手术治疗高龄急性梗阻性化脓性胆管炎患者的安全性与术式选择[J/OL]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2024, 13(06): 795-800.
[13] 严虹霞, 王晓娟, 张毅勋. 2 型糖尿病对结直肠癌患者肿瘤标记物、临床病理及预后的影响[J/OL]. 中华结直肠疾病电子杂志, 2024, 13(06): 483-487.
[14] 赵磊, 刘文志, 林峰, 于剑, 孙铭骏, 崔佑刚, 张旭, 衣宇鹏, 于宝胜, 冯宁. 深部热疗在改善结直肠癌术后辅助化疗副反应及生活质量中的作用研究[J/OL]. 中华结直肠疾病电子杂志, 2024, 13(06): 488-493.
[15] 黄海洋, 邝永龙, 陈嘉胜. 基层医院结直肠肿瘤经自然腔道取标本手术30 例分析[J/OL]. 中华结直肠疾病电子杂志, 2024, 13(06): 510-518.
阅读次数
全文


摘要