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]. 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]. 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] 刘林峰, 王增涛, 王云鹏, 钟硕, 郝丽文, 仇申强, 陈超. 足底内侧皮瓣联合甲骨皮瓣在手指V度缺损再造中的临床应用[J]. 中华损伤与修复杂志(电子版), 2023, 18(06): 480-484.
[2] 易晨, 张亚东, 董茜, 唐海阔, 刘志国. 应用骨盖技术拔除下颌低位骨性埋伏阻生第三磨牙的疗效观察[J]. 中华口腔医学研究杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 424-429.
[3] 唐旭, 韩冰, 刘威, 陈茹星. 结直肠癌根治术后隐匿性肝转移危险因素分析及预测模型构建[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 16-20.
[4] 张生军, 赵阿静, 李守博, 郝祥宏, 刘敏丽. 高糖通过HGF/c-met通路促进结直肠癌侵袭和迁移的实验研究[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 21-24.
[5] 李建美, 邓静娟, 杨倩. 两种术式联合治疗肝癌合并肝硬化门静脉高压的安全性及随访评价[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 41-44.
[6] 逄世江, 黄艳艳, 朱冠烈. 改良π形吻合在腹腔镜全胃切除消化道重建中的安全性和有效性研究[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 66-69.
[7] 杨体飞, 杨传虎, 陆振如. 改良无充气经腋窝入路全腔镜下甲状腺手术对喉返神经功能的影响研究[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 74-77.
[8] 陈垚, 徐伯群, 高志慧. 改良式中间上入路根治术治疗甲状腺癌的有效性安全性研究[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 619-622.
[9] 叶晋生, 路夷平, 梁燕凯, 于淼, 冀祯, 贺志坚, 张洪海, 王洁. 腹腔镜下应用生物补片修补直肠术后盆底缺损的疗效[J]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 688-691.
[10] 袁伟, 张修稳, 潘宏波, 章军, 王虎, 黄敏. 平片式与填充式腹股沟疝修补术的疗效比较[J]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 697-701.
[11] 倪文凯, 齐翀, 许小丹, 周燮程, 殷庆章, 蔡元坤. 结直肠癌患者术后发生延迟性肠麻痹的影响因素分析[J]. 中华结直肠疾病电子杂志, 2023, 12(06): 484-489.
[12] 范小彧, 孙司正, 鄂一民, 喻春钊. 梗阻性左半结肠癌不同手术治疗方案的选择应用[J]. 中华结直肠疾病电子杂志, 2023, 12(06): 500-504.
[13] 关旭, 王锡山. 基于外科与免疫视角思考结直肠癌区域淋巴结处理的功与过[J]. 中华结直肠疾病电子杂志, 2023, 12(06): 448-452.
[14] 顾睿祈, 方洪生, 蔡国响. 循环肿瘤DNA检测在结直肠癌诊治中的应用与进展[J]. 中华结直肠疾病电子杂志, 2023, 12(06): 453-459.
[15] 程相阵. 腹茧症9例诊治分析并文献复习[J]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(9): 968-971.
阅读次数
全文


摘要