Literature DB >> 15572090

Evaluating operative risk in colorectal cancer surgery: ASA and POSSUM-based predictive models.

Samar Al-Homoud1, Sanjay Purkayastha, Omer Aziz, Jason J Smith, Michael D Thompson, Ara W Darzi, Jeffrey D Stamatakis, Paris P Tekkis.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To review two predictive models, based on the American Society of Anaesthesiologists (ASA) and the Physiological and Operative Severity Score for the enumeration of Mortality and morbidity (POSSUM)-used for estimating postoperative mortality in patients, undergoing surgery for colorectal disease, in the UK.
METHODS: Data was derived from three multicentre, UK-based studies involving a total of 16,006 patients with malignant or non-malignant bowel pathologies. Data sources were: The Colorectal-POSSUM (CR-POSSUM) Study population, comprising 6883 patients undergoing colorectal surgery in 15 UK hospitals between 1993 and 2001; The Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland (ACPGBI) Colorectal Cancer (CRC) Database, encompassing 8077 newly diagnosed CRC patients, undergoing surgical resections in 79 hospitals, between April 2000 and March 2002; The ACPGBI Malignant Bowel Obstruction (MBO) Study, encompassing 1046 patients with MBO in 148 hospitals, treated between April 1998 and March 1999. Multifactorial logistic regression analyses were used to adjust for case-mix, identify risk factors for in-hospital/30-day operative mortality and to accommodate the variability of outcomes between hospitals.
RESULTS: In the ACPGBI CRC study, 7374 patients had surgery, 6622(89.8%) a major bowel resection and 1465(19.9%) emergency surgery. Nine hundred and eighty-nine (94.6%) patients with MBO had surgery and 854(86.3%) underwent bowel resection. In the CR-POSSUM study, of the 6790(98.6%) patients undergoing surgery, 3451(50.8%) had a major colorectal resection, including 2107(31.0%) as an emergency. The operative mortality was 7.5% for the ACPGBI CRC study, 15.7% for patients with MBO and 5.7% for patients in the CR-POSSUM study. When tested, the predictive models showed good discrimination, with an area under the receiver-operator characteristic curve of 77.5% for the ACPGBI CRC, 80.1% for the MBO and 89.8% for the CR-POSSUM.
CONCLUSIONS: Prediction of postoperative death can be made by the clinician using simple, numerical, tables derived from the ACPGBI CRC, MBO and CR-POSSUM models. The models can be used in everyday practice for pre-operative counselling of patients and their carers, as a part of the process of informed consent. They may also be used to compare the outcomes between multidisciplinary CRC teams.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15572090     DOI: 10.1016/j.suronc.2004.08.006

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Surg Oncol        ISSN: 0960-7404            Impact factor:   3.279


  24 in total

1.  The current status of emergent laparoscopic colectomy: a population-based study of clinical and financial outcomes.

Authors:  Deborah S Keller; Rodrigo Pedraza; Juan Ramon Flores-Gonzalez; Jean Paul LeFave; Ali Mahmood; Eric M Haas
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2015-10-21       Impact factor: 4.584

2.  Comparison of administrative data with the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland (ACPGBI) colorectal cancer database.

Authors:  Mohammed Garout; Henry S Tilney; Paris P Tekkis; Paul Aylin
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2007-10-25       Impact factor: 2.571

3.  Validation of the estimation of physiologic ability and surgical stress (E-PASS) score in liver surgery.

Authors:  Vanessa M Banz; Peter Studer; Daniel Inderbitzin; Daniel Candinas
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2009-06       Impact factor: 3.352

4.  Pre-operative Sarcopenia Identifies Patients at Risk for Poor Survival After Resection of Biliary Tract Cancers.

Authors:  Jeffery Chakedis; Gaya Spolverato; Eliza W Beal; Ingrid Woelfel; Fabio Bagante; Katiuscha Merath; Steven H Sun; Aaron Chafitz; Jason Galo; Mary Dillhoff; Jordan Cloyd; Timothy M Pawlik
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2018-05-31       Impact factor: 3.452

5.  External validation of Cleveland Clinic Foundation colorectal cancer model in a University Clinic in terms of predicting operative mortality.

Authors:  A B Dogrul; Y A Kiliç; A E Celebi; S Celik; G E Dumlu; E Cetinkaya; I Sayek
Journal:  Tech Coloproctol       Date:  2009-12-02       Impact factor: 3.781

6.  Heterogeneity of colon cancer patients reported as emergencies.

Authors:  H Gunnarsson; K Jennische; S Forssell; J Granström; P Jestin; A Ekholm; L I Olsson
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2014-07       Impact factor: 3.352

7.  Impact Total Psoas Volume on Short- and Long-Term Outcomes in Patients Undergoing Curative Resection for Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma: a New Tool to Assess Sarcopenia.

Authors:  Neda Amini; Gaya Spolverato; Rohan Gupta; Georgios A Margonis; Yuhree Kim; Doris Wagner; Neda Rezaee; Matthew J Weiss; Christopher L Wolfgang; Martin M Makary; Ihab R Kamel; Timothy M Pawlik
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2015-04-30       Impact factor: 3.452

8.  Transanal Endoscopic Microsurgery (TEM) for Rectal Cancer: University Hospital of North Tees Experience.

Authors:  Khalid A Osman; Daniel Ryan; Sorena Afshar; Zakir K Mohamed; Dharmendra Garg; Talvinder Gill
Journal:  Indian J Surg       Date:  2014-04-29       Impact factor: 0.656

9.  A critical evaluation of risk factors for complications after cytoreductive surgery and perioperative intraperitoneal chemotherapy for colorectal peritoneal carcinomatosis.

Authors:  Akshat Saxena; Tristan D Yan; David L Morris
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2010-01       Impact factor: 3.352

10.  Safety and morbidity after ultra-low coloanal anastomoses: J-pouch vs end-to-end reconstruction.

Authors:  Thomas Steffen; Ignazio Tarantino; Franc Heinrich Hetzer; René Warschkow; Jochen Lange; Michael Zünd
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2007-12-11       Impact factor: 2.571

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.