Predictive capacity of four comorbidity indices estimating perioperative mortality after radical cystectomy for urothelial carcinoma of the bladder.

UNLABELLED: What's known on the subject? and What does the study add? The degree of comorbidity significantly affects the course of patients with bladder cancer undergoing radical cystectomy (RC). To our knowledge this is the first study comparing four different comorbidity indices in patients undergoing RC for urothelial carcinoma to assess the best clinical predictors for 90-day perioperative mortality. We concluded that the ASA score should be the method of choice, as it showed a predictive ability superior to that of ECOG and CCI, and is much easier to generate than the ACE-27.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate which of the following among the Adult Comorbidity Evaluation-27 (ACE-27), the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI), the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG) and the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) comorbidity scores correlate best with perioperative mortality after radical cystectomy (RC) for urothelial carcinoma (UC) of the bladder. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A study was carried out on 555 unselected consecutive patients without neoadjuvant chemotherapy who underwent RC for UC of the bladder from 2000 to 2010 at one of two institutions. Patients' medical records were reviewed retrospectively. We established a defined binary linear progression model based on clinical variables to predict perioperative mortality <90 days after RC (90PM). To this model we added, individually, the comorbidity indices ACE-27, CCI, ECOG, and ASA to assess their predictive capacity regarding 90PM.
RESULTS: The overall 90PM was 7.9%. Age (P = 0.01) and clinical distant metastatic tumour stage (P = 0.002) were independent predictors for 90PM in the multivariate analysis. Each of the four investigated comorbidity indices was able to significantly increase the predictive capacity of the basic model: ECOG +13.5%, (odds ratio [OR]: 1.61, P = 0.036; area under the curve [AUC] 74.7), ASA Score +28.3% (OR: 2.19, P = 0.004; AUC 76.1), Charlson Index +12.3% (OR: 1.31, P = 0.047; AUC 73.8) and ACE-27 + 29.8% (OR: 1.72, P = 0.004; AUC 76.1).
CONCLUSIONS: ASA and ACE-27 show a nearly identical clinical predictive value for perioperative mortality. Both scores could be considered for clinical practice. With regard to ease of generation and availability, the ASA score can be regarded as the best instrument.