Literature DB >> 20195150

Failure of institutionally derived predictive models of conversion in laparoscopic colorectal surgery to predict conversion outcomes in an independent data set of 998 laparoscopic colorectal procedures.

Robert R Cima1, Imran Hassan, Venkateswara P Poola, David W Larson, Eric J Dozois, Dirk R Larson, Megan M O'Byrne, Marianne Huebner.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to perform an external validation of 2 institutionally derived predictive models of laparoscopic conversion in colorectal surgery using the Mayo Clinic, Rochester (MCR) laparoscopic colon and rectal surgery experience. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Two different predictive scoring systems of conversion in laparoscopic colorectal surgery were developed and published based upon single institution experiences. Neither model was validated on an independent data set. Thus, the utility of these models outside of their respective institutions is unknown.
METHODS: A prospectively collected data set of 998 laparoscopic colorectal procedures from MCR was analyzed. All patient-, procedure-, and surgeon-related factors used in both models were present in our data set. Logistic regression was used to evaluate their ability to predict conversion in our cohort. Model effectiveness was assessed by area under the curve from the logistic regression model, 95% confidence intervals for the observed number of conversions, and a goodness-of-fit test to compare the observed number of conversions with the predicted conversion rates for each score.
RESULTS: The cohort mean age of 552 women was 53, with a median body mass index of 25.2 kg/m. There were 382 right-sided, 251 left-sided, 46 rectal resections, and 151 proctocolectomies. Major diagnoses were inflammatory bowel disease 34%, cancer 18%, polyps 17%, and diverticular disease 13%. The overall MCR conversion rate was 15%. Several variables from the models were statistically significant predictors of conversion in our data set. However, both models performed similarly with an area under the curve of 0.62, suggesting that these models are of limited predictive value in our independent cohort with a performance closer to chance. The numbers of actual conversions were significantly different from the predicted number for both scoring systems.
CONCLUSION: Patient and clinical factors associated with laparoscopic conversion in colorectal surgery may be institution dependent. This finding cautions surgeons on the applicability of institution-based surgical predictive models. Independent data set validation is recommended before surgical predictive models are applied to general clinical practice.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20195150     DOI: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e3181d355f7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Surg        ISSN: 0003-4932            Impact factor:   12.969


  14 in total

1.  Enhanced recovery program following colorectal resection in the elderly patient.

Authors:  Nikhil Pawa; Paul L Cathcart; Tan H A Arulampalam; Matthew G Tutton; Roger W Motson
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2012-02       Impact factor: 3.352

2.  Short and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic colectomy in obese patients.

Authors:  Andrea Vignali; Paola De Nardi; Luca Ghirardelli; Saverio Di Palo; Carlo Staudacher
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2013-11-14       Impact factor: 5.742

Review 3.  Conversion during laparoscopic colorectal resections: a complication or a drawback? A systematic review and meta-analysis of short-term outcomes.

Authors:  Mariano Cesare Giglio; Valerio Celentano; Rachele Tarquini; Gaetano Luglio; Giovanni Domenico De Palma; Luigi Bucci
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2015-07-21       Impact factor: 2.571

Review 4.  Surgical Management of Diverticular Disease in the Elective Setting.

Authors:  Jeffrey A Neale
Journal:  Clin Colon Rectal Surg       Date:  2018-06-22

5.  Characteristics of learning curve in minimally invasive ileal pouch-anal anastomosis in a single institution.

Authors:  Ahmet Rencuzogullari; Luca Stocchi; Meagan Costedio; Emre Gorgun; Hermann Kessler; Feza H Remzi
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2016-07-12       Impact factor: 4.584

6.  The impact of laparoscopic converted to open colectomy on short-term and oncologic outcomes for colon cancer.

Authors:  Jian Li; Hui Guo; Xiao-Dong Guan; Chao-Nong Cai; Lu-Kun Yang; Yue-Chan Li; Yan-Hua Zhu; Pei-Ping Li; Xia-Lei Liu; Dong-Jie Yang
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2014-10-30       Impact factor: 3.452

7.  Laparoscopic colorectal resection in the obese patient.

Authors:  Sean T Martin; Luca Stocchi
Journal:  Clin Colon Rectal Surg       Date:  2011-12

8.  Abdominal fat ratio - a novel parameter for predicting conversion in laparoscopic colorectal surgery.

Authors:  S I Scott; S Farid; C Mann; R Jones; P Kang; J Evans
Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl       Date:  2016-08-09       Impact factor: 1.891

9.  Analysis of Early and Long-Term Oncologic Outcomes After Converted Laparoscopic Resection Compared to Primary Open Surgery for Rectal Cancer.

Authors:  Marco Ettore Allaix; Edgar Furnée; Laura Esposito; Massimiliano Mistrangelo; Fabrizio Rebecchi; Alberto Arezzo; Mario Morino
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2018-10       Impact factor: 3.352

10.  Population-based study of laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery 2006-2008.

Authors:  E F Taylor; J D Thomas; L E Whitehouse; P Quirke; D Jayne; P J Finan; D Forman; J R Wilkinson; E J A Morris
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  2013-01-03       Impact factor: 6.939

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.