Literature DB >> 20015540

"Surgical Apgar Score" predicts postoperative complications after cytoreduction for advanced ovarian cancer.

Israel Zighelboim1, Nora Kizer, Nicholas P Taylor, Ashley S Case, Feng Gao, Premal H Thaker, Janet S Rader, L Stewart Massad, David G Mutch, Matthew A Powell.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: A 10-point "Surgical Apgar Score" (SAS) for predicting postoperative complications after general and vascular operations has recently been developed and validated. We sought to estimate the ability of this metric to predict major postoperative complications in women undergoing ovarian cancer cytoreductive procedures.
METHODS: All eligible patients with stage III and IV epithelial ovarian, fallopian tube and primary peritoneal cancer undergoing surgical cytoreduction at our institution between 1999 and 2005 were included. Medical records were reviewed and demographic data, clinicopathologic characteristics, comorbidities and intra and postoperative complications were analyzed. The surgical score was calculated from intraoperative blood loss, lowest mean arterial pressure and lowest heart rate as previously described. Descriptive statistics, univariable and multivariable analyses were used as appropriate. Occurrence of major postoperative complications represented the primary outcome.
RESULTS: A total of 232 cases were analyzed. Mean age was 62 years. Most patients were Caucasian (92%) and diagnosed with stage III disease (83%). Mean duration of surgical procedure was 171 (70-350) minutes. Median SAS was 6 points (range 1-9). On multivariable analyses, occurrence of major postoperative complications was associated with multiple comorbidities (OR 2.2; 95% CI:1.5-3.1; p<0.0001), stage IV disease (OR 2.5; 95% CI:1.1-5.7; p=0.03), ASA class (OR 2.4; 95% CI:1.2-4.7; p=0.01) and SAS<or=4 (OR 7.4; 95% CI:2.9-18.8; p<0.0001).
CONCLUSIONS: Lower SAS (<or=4) is the most powerful predictor of postoperative complications in patients undergoing cytoreductive surgery for advanced epithelial ovarian cancer. This prognostic tool may prove helpful for triaging such patients to optimal postoperative levels of care and directing counseling, monitoring and management in the postoperative period.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 20015540     DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2009.11.031

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Gynecol Oncol        ISSN: 0090-8258            Impact factor:   5.482


  18 in total

1.  Utility of the Surgical Apgar Score in a district general hospital.

Authors:  Christopher C Thorn; Melanie Chan; Nihal Sinha; Richard A Harrison
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2012-05       Impact factor: 3.352

2.  Can the Surgical Apgar Score predict morbidity and mortality in general orthopaedic surgery?

Authors:  Julio Urrutia; Macarena Valdes; Tomas Zamora; Valentina Canessa; Jorge Briceno
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2012-11-06       Impact factor: 3.075

3.  Surgical Apgar score predicts perioperative morbidity in patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy at a high-volume center.

Authors:  M Mura Assifi; John Lindenmeyer; Benjamin E Leiby; Zvi Grunwald; Ernest L Rosato; Eugene P Kennedy; Charles J Yeo; Adam C Berger
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2011-10-27       Impact factor: 3.452

4.  Pre-operative assessment and post-operative outcomes of elderly women with gynecologic cancers, primary analysis of NRG CC-002: An NRG oncology group/gynecologic oncology group study.

Authors:  Amina Ahmed; Wei Deng; William Tew; David Bender; Robert S Mannel; Ramey D Littell; Albert S DeNittis; Mitchell Edelson; Mark Morgan; Jay Carlson; Christopher J Darus; Aimee C Fleury; Susan Modesitt; Alexander Olawaiye; Anthony Evans; Gini F Fleming
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2018-05-26       Impact factor: 5.482

5.  Combining the ASA Physical Classification System and Continuous Intraoperative Surgical Apgar Score Measurement in Predicting Postoperative Risk.

Authors:  Monika Zdenka Jering; Khensani N Marolen; Matthew S Shotwell; Jason N Denton; Warren S Sandberg; Jesse Menachem Ehrenfeld
Journal:  J Med Syst       Date:  2015-09-10       Impact factor: 4.460

6.  Utility of the Surgical Apgar Score in Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma.

Authors:  Andrew C Prince; Kristine E Day; Chee Paul Lin; Benjamin J Greene; William R Carroll
Journal:  Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg       Date:  2018-06-05       Impact factor: 3.497

7.  The surgical Apgar score is strongly associated with intensive care unit admission after high-risk intraabdominal surgery.

Authors:  Julia B Sobol; Hayley B Gershengorn; Hannah Wunsch; Guohua Li
Journal:  Anesth Analg       Date:  2013-06-06       Impact factor: 5.108

8.  Improvement of the Surgical Apgar Score by Addition of Intraoperative Blood Transfusion Among Patients Undergoing Major Gastrointestinal Surgery.

Authors:  Aslam Ejaz; Faiz Gani; Steven M Frank; Timothy M Pawlik
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2016-08-12       Impact factor: 3.452

9.  Use of the surgical Apgar score to guide postoperative care.

Authors:  J B Haddow; H Adwan; S E Clark; S Tayeh; S S Antonowicz; P Jayia; D W Chicken; T Wiggins; R Davenport; S Kaptanis; M Fakhry; C H Knowles; A S Elmetwally; E Geddoa; M S Nair; I Naeem; S Adegbola; L J Muirhead
Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl       Date:  2014-07       Impact factor: 1.891

10.  Surgical Apgar Score Predicted Postoperative Morbidity After Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer.

Authors:  Kojiro Eto; Naoya Yoshida; Masaaki Iwatsuki; Junji Kurashige; Satoshi Ida; Takatsugu Ishimoto; Yoshifumi Baba; Yasuo Sakamoto; Yuji Miyamoto; Masayuki Watanabe; Hideo Baba
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2016-05       Impact factor: 3.352

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.