Literature DB >> 17687581

Comparison and validation of scoring systems in a cohort of patients treated for perforated peptic ulcer.

Mahmut Koç1, Omer Yoldaş, Yusuf Alper Kiliç, Erdal Göçmen, Tamer Ertan, Hayrettin Dizen, Mesut Tez.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The aim of this study is to evaluate the predictive accuracy of different scoring systems on surgery for perforated peptic ulcer referred to an academic department of general surgery in a tertiary reference center. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Seventy-five consecutive patients (Male/female ratio = 64:11; mean age, 44 years; range, 16-85) with perforated peptic ulcer disease were investigated. Disease severity scores and mortality predictions were calculated using the collected data during admission. Discrimination and calibration characteristics of each system, namely, the acute physiology and chronic health evaluation II and III, the simplified acute physiology score II, and the mortality probability models (MPM) II, were determined by using the area under receiver operating characteristics curve and the Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test, respectively.
RESULTS: Among the 75 patients included, there were eight (10.6%) mortalities. All systems had a reliable power of discrimination and calibration. Among the systems tested, MPM II was the best performing as far as discrimination and calibration characteristics were considered. The parameters of MPM II system that were related to systemic perfusion of the patient were significantly positive in patients who died compared to those who survived.
CONCLUSIONS: MPM II that predicted mortality at admission is better than the other systems in predicting mortality. Results also indicate the importance of maintenance of systemic perfusion of the patient at the early phases of peptic ulcer perforation.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17687581     DOI: 10.1007/s00423-007-0156-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Surg        ISSN: 1435-2443            Impact factor:   3.445


  16 in total

1.  Significant factors associated with fatal outcome in emergency open surgery for perforated peptic ulcer.

Authors:  Mario Testini; Piero Portincasa; Giuseppe Piccinni; Germana Lissidini; Fabio Pellegrini; Luigi Greco
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2003-10       Impact factor: 5.742

2.  [Prognostic risk factors in patients operated on for perforated peptic ulcer. A retrospective analysis of critical factors of mortality and morbidity in a series of 40 patients who underwent simple closure surgery].

Authors:  M Chiarugi; P Buccianti; O Goletti; L Decanini; F Sidoti; E Cavina
Journal:  Ann Ital Chir       Date:  1996 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 0.766

3.  The meaning and use of the area under a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve.

Authors:  J A Hanley; B J McNeil
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1982-04       Impact factor: 11.105

4.  A review of goodness of fit statistics for use in the development of logistic regression models.

Authors:  S Lemeshow; D W Hosmer
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  1982-01       Impact factor: 4.897

5.  Predicting mortality and morbidity of patients operated on for perforated peptic ulcers.

Authors:  F Y Lee; K L Leung; B S Lai; S S Ng; S Dexter; W Y Lau
Journal:  Arch Surg       Date:  2001-01

6.  Severity scoring for prognostication in patients with severe acute pancreatitis: comparative analysis of the Ranson score and the APACHE III score.

Authors:  Soumitra R Eachempati; Lynn J Hydo; Philip S Barie
Journal:  Arch Surg       Date:  2002-06

7.  Perforated gastric and duodenal ulcer: an analysis of prognostic factors.

Authors:  L S Hamby; T N Zweng; W E Strodel
Journal:  Am Surg       Date:  1993-05       Impact factor: 0.688

8.  Mortality Probability Models (MPM II) based on an international cohort of intensive care unit patients.

Authors:  S Lemeshow; D Teres; J Klar; J S Avrunin; S H Gehlbach; J Rapoport
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1993-11-24       Impact factor: 56.272

9.  A new Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS II) based on a European/North American multicenter study.

Authors:  J R Le Gall; S Lemeshow; F Saulnier
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1993 Dec 22-29       Impact factor: 56.272

10.  Risk stratification in perforated duodenal ulcers. A prospective validation of predictive factors.

Authors:  J Boey; S K Choi; A Poon; T T Alagaratnam
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  1987-01       Impact factor: 12.969

View more
  7 in total

1.  External validation of a US-derived nomogram that predicts individual survival after gastric cancer resection.

Authors:  Mahmut Koc; Hayrettin Dizen; Necdet Ozalp; Mehmet Keskek; Nazile Karakose; Mesut Tez
Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Surg       Date:  2008-10-08       Impact factor: 3.445

2.  Perforated Duodenal Ulcer: Has Anything Changed?

Authors:  Selja Koskensalo; Ari Leppäniemi
Journal:  Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg       Date:  2010-03-08       Impact factor: 3.693

3.  Development of a simplified diagnostic indicators scoring system and validation for peptic ulcer perforation in a developing country.

Authors:  Chutikarn Suriya; Nongyao Kasatpibal; Wipada Kunaviktikul; Toranee Kayee
Journal:  Clin Exp Gastroenterol       Date:  2012-09-25

4.  Assessment of PULP score in predicting 30-day perforated duodenal ulcer morbidity, and comparison of its performance with Boey and ASA, a retrospective study.

Authors:  Tamer Saafan; Walid El Ansari; Omer Al-Yahri; Ammar Eleter; Hisham Eljohary; Rashad Alfkey; Mustafa Hajjar; Ali Toffaha; Abdelrahman El Osta
Journal:  Ann Med Surg (Lond)       Date:  2019-05-10

Review 5.  Scoring systems for outcome prediction in patients with perforated peptic ulcer.

Authors:  Kenneth Thorsen; Jon Arne Søreide; Kjetil Søreide
Journal:  Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med       Date:  2013-04-10       Impact factor: 2.953

6.  A prospective study evaluating utility of Mannheim peritonitis index in predicting prognosis of perforation peritonitis.

Authors:  Rajesh Sharma; Vikrant Ranjan; Suraj Jain; Tulika Joshi; Anurag Tyagi; Rohan Chaphekar
Journal:  J Nat Sci Biol Med       Date:  2015-08

7.  Assessing the risk: Scoring systems for outcome prediction in emergency laparotomies.

Authors:  Deb Sanjay Nag
Journal:  Biomedicine (Taipei)       Date:  2015-11-28
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.