BACKGROUND: A nomogram has been developed recently in order to predict the occurrence and severity of postoperative complications after esophagectomy for cancer. In the present study, we externally validated this nomogram in a new cohort of patients who underwent esophagectomy for cancer in a different high-volume center. METHODS: An independent dataset of 777 patients who underwent esophagectomy for cancer was used for validation. The discriminatory capability of the nomogram was determined by using the concordance index (C statistic). Calibration was evaluated by comparing the observed with the expected number of patients with complications, as predicted by the original nomogram across patients with different risk profiles. We also examined whether adjusting the value of the original coefficients of the predictors or adding new predictors would improve the fit of the nomogram. RESULTS: Discrimination of the original nomogram was similar in the validation cohort: the C statistic hardly decreased from 0.65 in the original cohort to 0.64 in the validation cohort. Observed and expected number of patients with complications were in close agreement, reflecting a good calibration (p = 0.84). Reestimation of the coefficients in the validation cohort did not lead to any significant changes of the original nomogram values. CONCLUSIONS: External validation of a nomogram predicting the occurrence and severity of complications after esophagectomy showed that the model is applicable in other high-volume hospitals. Nevertheless, preoperative prediction of complications in individual patients remains difficult, most likely due to the complexity of mechanisms causing these complications. 2010 The Society of Thoracic Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
BACKGROUND: A nomogram has been developed recently in order to predict the occurrence and severity of postoperative complications after esophagectomy for cancer. In the present study, we externally validated this nomogram in a new cohort of patients who underwent esophagectomy for cancer in a different high-volume center. METHODS: An independent dataset of 777 patients who underwent esophagectomy for cancer was used for validation. The discriminatory capability of the nomogram was determined by using the concordance index (C statistic). Calibration was evaluated by comparing the observed with the expected number of patients with complications, as predicted by the original nomogram across patients with different risk profiles. We also examined whether adjusting the value of the original coefficients of the predictors or adding new predictors would improve the fit of the nomogram. RESULTS: Discrimination of the original nomogram was similar in the validation cohort: the C statistic hardly decreased from 0.65 in the original cohort to 0.64 in the validation cohort. Observed and expected number of patients with complications were in close agreement, reflecting a good calibration (p = 0.84). Reestimation of the coefficients in the validation cohort did not lead to any significant changes of the original nomogram values. CONCLUSIONS: External validation of a nomogram predicting the occurrence and severity of complications after esophagectomy showed that the model is applicable in other high-volume hospitals. Nevertheless, preoperative prediction of complications in individual patients remains difficult, most likely due to the complexity of mechanisms causing these complications. 2010 The Society of Thoracic Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
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
Authors: Meena Bedi; Cecilia G Ethun; John Charlson; Thuy B Tran; George Poultsides; Valerie Grignol; J Harrison Howard; Jennifer Tseng; Kevin K Roggin; Konstantinos Chouliaras; Konstantinos Votanopoulos; Darren Cullinan; Ryan C Fields; Kenneth Cardona; David M King Journal: Clin Orthop Relat Res Date: 2020-03 Impact factor: 4.755
Authors: Sandra H Hoeboer; A B Johan Groeneveld; Noel Engels; Michel van Genderen; Bas P L Wijnhoven; Jasper van Bommel Journal: J Gastrointest Surg Date: 2015-02-07 Impact factor: 3.452
Authors: H G van den Boorn; E G Engelhardt; J van Kleef; M A G Sprangers; M G H van Oijen; A Abu-Hanna; A H Zwinderman; V M H Coupé; H W M van Laarhoven Journal: PLoS One Date: 2018-02-08 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Lucas Goense; Peter S N van Rossum; Mian Xi; Dipen M Maru; Brett W Carter; Gert J Meijer; Linus Ho; Richard van Hillegersberg; Wayne L Hofstetter; Steven H Lin Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2018-03-22 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Vladimir Prochazka; Filip Marek; Lumir Kunovsky; Roman Svaton; Martina Farkasova; Martin Potrusil; Petr Moravcik; Zdenek Kala Journal: J Minim Access Surg Date: 2019 Jan-Mar Impact factor: 1.407