Literature DB >> 21431986

A comparison of POSSUM and GPS models in the prediction of post-operative outcome in patients undergoing oesophago-gastric cancer resection.

Sumanta Dutta1, Nesrin M Al-Mrabt, Grant M Fullarton, Paul G Horgan, Donald C McMillan.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: There is some evidence that a patient's pre-operative condition influences short-term and long-term post-operative outcomes. The aim of the present study is to compare the physiological and operative severity score for the enumeration of mortality and morbidity (POSSUM) and modified Glasgow prognostic score (mGPS) models in the prediction of post-operative outcome, both short term and long term, in patients undergoing resection of oesophago-gastric cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients who underwent curative resection for oesophago-gastric cancer from January 2005 to May 2009 and who had data to score the POSSUM, P-POSSUM, O-POSSUM and mGPS models were included in the study. Observed morbidity and mortality rates were compared with predicted outcome in different risk groups. Both short-term outcome and long-term survival were recorded.
RESULTS: Observed morbidity was 49%, whereas POSSUM predicted post-operative morbidity in 60%, giving an overall standardised morbidity ratio of 0.82. Only male sex [hazard ratio (HR) 3.61, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.38-9.46, P = 0.009] and POSSUM physiology score (HR 2.13, 95% CI 1.11-4.08, P = 0.023) were independently associated with post-operative morbidity. The post-operative mortality rates predicted by POSSUM, P-POSSUM and O-POSSUM were 16.5, 5.8 and 9.9%, respectively, giving a standardised mortality ratio of 0.25, 0.71 and 0.42. Only mGPS (HR 1.96, 95% CI 1.09-3.54, P = 0.025) and tumour-node-metastasis (TNM) stage (HR 2.21, 95% CI 1.44-3.38, P < 0.001) were independently associated with cancer-specific survival.
CONCLUSIONS: The POSSUM physiology score was useful in predicting post-operative morbidity, and the mGPS was useful in predicting cancer-specific survival, in patients undergoing surgery for oesophago-gastric cancer.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21431986     DOI: 10.1245/s10434-011-1676-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol        ISSN: 1068-9265            Impact factor:   5.344


  14 in total

1.  The modified Glasgow Prognostic Score (mGPS) is a good predictor of indication for palliative bypass surgery in patients with unresectable pancreatic and biliary cancers.

Authors:  Yoshiaki Ikuta; Hiroshi Takamori; Yasuo Sakamoto; Daisuke Hashimoto; Akira Chikamoto; Hideyuki Kuroki; Kazuya Sakata; Keita Sakamoto; Hiromitsu Hayashi; Katsunori Imai; Hidetoshi Nitta; Masahiko Hirota; Keiichiro Kanemitsu; Toru Beppu; Hideo Baba
Journal:  Int J Clin Oncol       Date:  2013-09-03       Impact factor: 3.402

Review 2.  Individual risk modelling for esophagectomy: a systematic review.

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

3.  Prognostic significance of the modified Glasgow prognostic score in elderly patients with gastric cancer.

Authors:  Kotaro Hirashima; Masayuki Watanabe; Hironobu Shigaki; Yu Imamura; Satoshi Ida; Masaaki Iwatsuki; Takatsugu Ishimoto; Shiro Iwagami; Yoshifumi Baba; Hideo Baba
Journal:  J Gastroenterol       Date:  2013-07-03       Impact factor: 7.527

4.  Original scoring system for predicting postoperative morbidity after esophagectomy for esophageal cancer.

Authors:  Naoya Yoshida; Yoshifumi Baba; Masayuki Watanabe; Satoshi Ida; Takatsugu Ishimoto; Ryuichi Karashima; Shiro Iwagami; Yu Imamura; Yasuo Sakamoto; Yuji Miyamoto; Hideo Baba
Journal:  Surg Today       Date:  2014-07-06       Impact factor: 2.549

5.  Significance of the inflammation-based Glasgow prognostic score for short- and long-term outcomes after curative resection of gastric cancer.

Authors:  Takeshi Kubota; Naoki Hiki; Souya Nunobe; Koshi Kumagai; Susumu Aikou; Ryohei Watanabe; Takeshi Sano; Toshiharu Yamaguchi
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2012-09-25       Impact factor: 3.452

6.  Duration of Smoking Cessation and Postoperative Morbidity After Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer: How Long Should Patients Stop Smoking Before Surgery?

Authors:  Naoya Yoshida; Yoshifumi Baba; Yukiharu Hiyoshi; Hironobu Shigaki; Junji Kurashige; Yasuo Sakamoto; Yuji Miyamoto; Masaaki Iwatsuki; Takatsugu Ishimoto; Keisuke Kosumi; Hidetaka Sugihara; Kazuto Harada; Ryuma Tokunaga; Daisuke Izumi; Masayuki Watanabe; Hideo Baba
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2016-01       Impact factor: 3.352

7.  Preoperative Nutritional Assessment by Controlling Nutritional Status (CONUT) is Useful to estimate Postoperative Morbidity After Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer.

Authors:  Naoya Yoshida; Yoshifumi Baba; Hironobu Shigaki; Kazuto Harada; Masaaki Iwatsuki; Junji Kurashige; Yasuo Sakamoto; Yuji Miyamoto; Takatsugu Ishimoto; Keisuke Kosumi; Ryuma Tokunaga; Yu Imamura; Satoshi Ida; Yukiharu Hiyoshi; Masayuki Watanabe; Hideo Baba
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2016-08       Impact factor: 3.352

8.  Assessing surgical quality: comparison of general and procedure-specific morbidity estimation models for the risk adjustment of pancreaticoduodenectomy outcomes.

Authors:  C Ansorge; P Lindström; L Strömmer; J Blomberg; L Lundell; A Andrén-Sandberg; M Del Chiaro; R Segersvärd
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2014-09       Impact factor: 3.352

9.  A Novel Inflammation-Based Prognostic Score, the C-Reactive Protein/Albumin Ratio Predicts the Prognosis of Patients with Operable Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma.

Authors:  Xiao-Ling Xu; Hui-Qin Yu; Wei Hu; Qian Song; Wei-Min Mao
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-09-21       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Assessment of the Addition of Hypoalbuminemia to ACS-NSQIP Surgical Risk Calculator in Colorectal Cancer.

Authors:  Wan-Hsiang Hu; Hong-Hwa Chen; Ko-Chao Lee; Lin Liu; Samuel Eisenstein; Lisa Parry; Bard Cosman; Sonia Ramamoorthy
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2016-03       Impact factor: 1.889

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.