BACKGROUND: Different prediction models for operative mortality after esophagectomy have been developed. The aim of this study is to independently validate prediction models from Philadelphia, Rotterdam, Munich, and the ASA. METHODS: The scores were validated using logistic regression models in two cohorts of patients undergoing esophagectomy for cancer from Switzerland (n = 170) and Australia (n = 176). RESULTS: All scores except ASA were significantly higher in the Australian cohort. There was no significant difference in 30-day mortality or in-hospital death between groups. The Philadelphia and Rotterdam scores had a significant predictive value for 30-day mortality (p = 0.001) and in-hospital death (p = 0.003) in the pooled cohort, but only the Philadelphia score had a significant prediction value for 30-day mortality in both cohorts. Neither score showed any predictive value for in-hospital death in Australians but were highly significant in the Swiss cohort. ASA showed only a significant predictive value for 30-day mortality in the Swiss. For in-hospital death, ASA was a significant predictor in the pooled and Swiss cohorts. The Munich score did not have any significant predictive value whatsoever. CONCLUSION: None of the scores can be applied generally. A better overall predictive score or specific prediction scores for each country should be developed.
BACKGROUND: Different prediction models for operative mortality after esophagectomy have been developed. The aim of this study is to independently validate prediction models from Philadelphia, Rotterdam, Munich, and the ASA. METHODS: The scores were validated using logistic regression models in two cohorts of patients undergoing esophagectomy for cancer from Switzerland (n = 170) and Australia (n = 176). RESULTS: All scores except ASA were significantly higher in the Australian cohort. There was no significant difference in 30-day mortality or in-hospital death between groups. The Philadelphia and Rotterdam scores had a significant predictive value for 30-day mortality (p = 0.001) and in-hospital death (p = 0.003) in the pooled cohort, but only the Philadelphia score had a significant prediction value for 30-day mortality in both cohorts. Neither score showed any predictive value for in-hospital death in Australians but were highly significant in the Swiss cohort. ASA showed only a significant predictive value for 30-day mortality in the Swiss. For in-hospital death, ASA was a significant predictor in the pooled and Swiss cohorts. The Munich score did not have any significant predictive value whatsoever. CONCLUSION: None of the scores can be applied generally. A better overall predictive score or specific prediction scores for each country should be developed.
Authors: S G Swisher; L Deford; K W Merriman; G L Walsh; R Smythe; A Vaporicyan; J A Ajani; T Brown; R Komaki; J A Roth; J B Putnam Journal: J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg Date: 2000-06 Impact factor: 5.209
Authors: Justin B Dimick; Reid M Wainess; Gilbert R Upchurch; Mark D Iannettoni; Mark B Orringer Journal: Ann Thorac Surg Date: 2005-01 Impact factor: 4.330
Authors: James D Luketich; Miguel Alvelo-Rivera; Percival O Buenaventura; Neil A Christie; James S McCaughan; Virginia R Litle; Philip R Schauer; John M Close; Hiran C Fernando Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2003-10 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: John M Findlay; Richard S Gillies; Bruno Sgromo; Robert E K Marshall; Mark R Middleton; Nicholas D Maynard Journal: J Gastrointest Surg Date: 2014-04-24 Impact factor: 3.452