Literature DB >> 25248708

[Value of modified POSSUM scoring system on predicting operation risk 
in elderly NSCLC patients].

Rong Wang1, Dewei Gao1, Weiqin Gong1, Zhiru Liang1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: For the assessment of elderly patients can tolerate lung cancer operation, there is no clear standard. To evaluate the clinical validity of POSSUM (Physiological and Operative Severity Score for the Umeration of Mortality and Morbidity) in elderly non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) surgery patients, we want to provide an important basis for operation treatment decisions.
METHODS: A total of 138 patients, with 88 males and 50 females, with elderly NSCLC surgery between December 2007 and December 2013, are included in PLA general hospital. Using the multivariate Logistic regression analysis, we evaluate the value of each factor on the actual postoperative complications mortality and morbidity. The scorings on standard POSSUM and modified POSSUM in the complication group are compared with the non-complication group using the group t test. Drawing receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve in standard POSSUM group and modified POSSUM group, calculating the area under the curve (AUC), AUC in standard group is compared with modified group using t test. Judge if the modified POSSUM prediction is consistent with the actual mortality and morbidity.
RESULTS: Among 138 patients, there were 77 postoperative complications in 59 patients, 2 cases of death. According to the Logistic regression analysis, 17 of 18 factors in standard POSSUM, pulmonary function, different TNM stage are predictors for postoperative complications (P<0.05). Age is a predictor for postoperative death (P<0.05). In the standard POSSUM scoring, actual complication group compared with non-complication group, the difference is statistically significant (P<0.01). In the modified POSSUM scoring, complication group is compared with non-complication group, the difference is statistically significant (P<0.01). Compared with the standard POSSUM, the modified POSSUM has better predictive value on postoperative morbidity, and the comparison of AUC between the two groups is statistically significant. But the latter shows the overpredicted mortality (P<0.01).
CONCLUSIONS: The modified POSSUM has a good predictive value on postoperative complications in elderly NSCLC surgery patients, so it can provide the basis for decision-making operation treatment.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25248708      PMCID: PMC6000503          DOI: 10.3779/j.issn.1009-3419.2014.09.05

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Zhongguo Fei Ai Za Zhi        ISSN: 1009-3419


据中国肿瘤登记中心2012年报显示:肺癌已位居全国恶性肿瘤发病的第一位[。随着社会老龄化,肺癌在老年人中也有较高的发病率,非小细胞肺癌(non-small cell lung cancer, NSCLC)的中位发病年龄为70岁[。老年人早期的NSCLC首选治疗方法为手术治疗[。而老年肺癌患者是否选择手术治疗,不仅要考虑到患者的实际年龄,更需要考虑患者的全身状况、内科合并症及生命预期、手术获益与风险等情况[。目前评价老年患者能否耐受肺癌手术的方法尚无明确标准。POSSUM(Physiological and Operative Severity Score for the Umeration of Mortality and Morbidity)评分系统是Copeland[于1991年提出的,最早用于预测胃肠道手术后并发症发生率和病死率。它包含12项生理学指标,分别是:年龄、心脏征象、呼吸系统、收缩压、脉率、Glasgow昏迷评分、血红蛋白、白细胞、尿素、钠、钾、心电图。及6项手术严重度指标,分别是:手术范围、30天内手术次数、失血量、腹腔感染、恶性肿瘤和手术类别。以上指标按其程度分为1分、2分、4分、8分。1分为最轻,8分为最重。而将POSSUM评分用于老年肺癌手术患者的评估,目前报道甚少。本研究拟通过标准POSSUM评分及改良的POSSUM评分对老年肺癌手术患者术后风险进行预测,并与实际手术并发症发生率和病死率进行比较,来衡量改良POSSUM评分在老年肺癌手术并发症和手术死亡中的预测价值。

资料与方法

一般资料

收集从2007年12月-2013年12月解放军总医院连续住院行肺癌手术的老年患者138例。其中男性88例,女性50例。年龄65岁-86岁,平均(71.2±11.4)岁。术后病理诊断:细支气管肺泡癌62例,腺癌36例,鳞癌29例,腺鳞癌3例,大细胞癌3例,类癌2例,未分化癌2例,复合性癌1例。TNM分期:Ⅰa期56例,Ⅰb期41例,Ⅱa期19例,Ⅱb期11例,Ⅲa期6例,Ⅲb期5例。

手术方式

肺叶切除术66例,其中胸腔镜辅助下肺叶切除术50例;肺楔形切除术38例,其中胸腔镜辅助下肺楔形切除术26例;肺段切除术34例,其中胸腔镜辅助下肺段切除术23例。

纳入与排除标准

纳入标准:年龄≥65岁;病理证实为NSCLC;术前未行放化疗治疗。排除标准:年龄 < 65岁;病理证实为小细胞肺癌;术前已行放化疗治疗;合并全身转移的Ⅳ期患者;肺转移癌。

研究方法

资料的收集

根据标准POSSUM评分系统收集每位患者术前24 h的12项生理学指标及6项手术严重度指标。并收集文献报道中可能影响并发症发生和手术死亡的因素:肺功能指标包括:第1秒用力呼气率(forced expiratory in the frst second, FEV1%)和肺一氧化碳弥散率(diffusing capacity of the lung for carbon monoxide, DLCO%)、手术时间、手术方式、病理分型、肿瘤分期。并按照标准POSSUM和改良POSSUM分别进行评分。根据COPELAND方程[计算术后(30 d内)并发症发生概率(R1)和手术死亡概率(R2)的预测值。并统计术后实际并发症发生例数和手术死亡例数。COPELAND方程如下: ln[R1/(1-R1)]=-5.91+(0.16×生理学评分)+(0.19×手术侵袭度评分) ln[R2/(1-R2)]=-7.04+(0.13×生理学评分)+(0.16×手术侵袭度评分)

病例分组

以实际有无手术并发症分为并发症组和无并发症组,因死亡例数少,死亡病例未单独分组。依照标准POSSUM及改良POSSUM评分计算出R1和R2的预测值,分为预测并发症组和实际并发症组;预测病死率组和实际病死率组。

统计学方法

采用SPSS 17.0和MedCalc 13.0.0统计软件进行统计分析。计量资料采用Mean±SD表示,预测并发症发生率和病死率用百分比表示。各影响因素对术后实际并发症发生率和病死率的影响,采用二值多元Logistic回归分析。采用成组t检验对有、无并发症组的标准POSSUM评分值进行比较。同法,比较改良POSSUM评分值。绘制标准POSSUM和改良POSSUM的受试者工作特征曲线(receiver operating characteristic curve, ROC),计算曲线下面积(area under the curve, AUC),两组间AUC比较采用t检验。计算改良POSSUM评分预测和实际并发症发生率和病死率的符合度。P < 0.05为差异有统计学意义。

结果

术后并发症与死亡情况

共有59例患者发生术后并发症77例次,发生率为42.8%。其中发热(排除术后吸收热)17例,术后出血2例,气胸8例,肺不张5例,肺部感染5例,脓胸1例,呼吸衰竭3例,哮喘1例,皮下气肿6例,大面积肺栓塞1例,急性心衰2例,高血压4例,心律失常6例,急性冠脉综合征5例,不全性肠梗阻2例,高胰酶血症2例,急性胆囊炎1例,痛风1例,电解质紊乱2例,谵妄2例,急性肾功能衰竭1例。术后死亡2例,其中因急性大面积肺动脉栓塞死亡1例;因术后出血及肺部感染导致呼吸衰竭死亡1例。

Logistic回归分析

以术后实际并发症发生率及病死率为因变量,标准POSSU M的12项生理学指标和6项手术严重度指标及FEV1%、DLCO%、手术时间、手术方式、病理分型、肿瘤分期为自变量进行Logistic回归分析。标准POSSUM的18项指标除glasgow昏迷评分外,余下17项指标和FEV1%、DLCO%及肿瘤分期对术后并发症发生有统计学意义(P < 0.05)。而手术时间、手术方式、病理分型对术后并发症发生率无统计学意义(P > 0.05)。仅年龄对术后病死率有统计学意义(P < 0.05)。 结合以上统计分析结果,在原POSSUM评分基础上,将FEV1%和DLCO%赋值带入生理学指标,胸腔感染赋值带入手术侵袭度指标,建立改良POSSUM评分系统(表 1)。手术时间、手术方式因无统计学意义未赋值带入。肿瘤分期按标准POSSUM赋值带入。
1

肺功能及胸腔感染赋值

The assignment of lung fuction and chest infection

1 score2 score4 score8 score
FEV1: forced expiratory in the first second; DLCO: diffusing capacity of the lung for carbon monoxide.
FEV1%> 7171-6060-41≤40
DLCO%> 8181-7777-72≤72
InfectionNonClearPusContents of gastrointestinal tract
肺功能及胸腔感染赋值 The assignment of lung fuction and chest infection

标准POSSUM和改良POSSUM生理学评分和手术严重度评分对术后实际并发症发生的影响

在标准POSSUM评分中,实际并发症组与无并发症组的生理学评分、手术严重度评分比较,差异有统计学意义(P < 0.01)。在改良POSSUM评分中,并发症组与无并发症组的生理学评分、手术严重度评分比较,差异有统计学意义(P < 0.01)(表 2)。
2

有无并发症组的标准POSSUM和改良POSSUM评分比较

The comparison of standard POSSUM scoring and modified POSSUM scoring between with and without complication groups

Complication (n=64)Non-complication (n=74)
PhysiologicalOperative severityPhysiologicalOperative severity
*vs physiological score of non-complication group, P < 0.01; #vs operative severity score of non-complication group, P < 0.01. POSSUM: Physiological and Operative Severity Score for the Umeration of Mortality and Morbidity.
Standard22.1±5.5*11.6±0.7#18.8±4.410.5±0.8
Modified24.5±4.8*12.1±0.9#20.3±5.111.6±0.7
有无并发症组的标准POSSUM和改良POSSUM评分比较 The comparison of standard POSSUM scoring and modified POSSUM scoring between with and without complication groups

POSSUM和改良POSSUM预测并发症发生率AUC的比较

标准POSSUM和改良POSSUM预测的术后并发症发生率与实际并发症发生分别进行比较并绘制ROC曲线,计算AUC,两组间AUC比较差异有统计学意义(P < 0.01)(表 3)。改良POSSUM的AUC更接近1,较标准POSSUM相比,其对术后并发症发生的预测价值更好。因实际死亡例数较少,无法进行预测病死率与实际死亡人数的ROC曲线绘制。
3

标准POSSUM与改良POSSUM曲线下面积的比较

The comparison of AUC between standard POSSUM and modified POSSUM

AUC95%CIP value
AUC: area under the curve.
Standard0.64±0.110.44-0.80﹤0.01
Modified0.73±0.090.54-0.87
标准POSSUM与改良POSSUM曲线下面积的比较 The comparison of AUC between standard POSSUM and modified POSSUM

POSSUM评分预测并发症发生率和病死率与实际值的比较

POSSUM评分预测并发症发生率与实际并发症发生的O/E值波动在0.83-1.33。但改良POSSUM评分预测病死率与手术死亡的O/E值仅为0-0.50,存在过度预测(表 4,表 5)。
4

改良POSSUM预测与实际术后并发症发生的例数对比

The comparison between predicted and actual complition cases

R1 (%)nAverage R1 (%)PredictedActualO/E
R1: postoperative complications' incidence rate; O/E: observed to expected ratio.
0-1026.2±1.84001.00
11-201815.5±2.55341.33
21-304427.8±2.8713171.30
31-401035.0±5.65441.00
41-501744.1±2.31870.88
51-603255.8±3.3418170.95
61-70964.2±2.82650.83
71-80472.3±3.51331.00
> 80285.1±4.16221.00
5

改良POSSUM预测与实际手术死亡的例数对比

The comparison between predicted and actual death cases

R2 (%)nAverage R2 (%)PredictedActualO/E
R2: mortality rate.
0-101193.4±2.33410.25
11-201114.1±1.78100
21-30823.6±3.21210.50
改良POSSUM预测与实际术后并发症发生的例数对比 The comparison between predicted and actual complition cases 改良POSSUM预测与实际手术死亡的例数对比 The comparison between predicted and actual death cases

讨论

标准POSSUM评分系统最早提出于1991年[。最新的meta分析显示对于肝胆胰手术来说,标准POSSUM评分过高预测了手术并发症和手术死亡[。而针对血管外科的V-POSSUM评分[;针对胃食道手术的O-POSSUM评分[;针对结直肠手术的Cr-POSSUM评分[却能更好地预测术后并发症发生及手术死亡。究其原因,手术技术的不断改进,特别是微创技术的广泛应用,使得术后并发症和手术死亡不断下降,故而较早提出的标准POSSUM预测值偏高。曾有报道由于微创技术的应用,平均年龄72岁的老年患者胸腔镜辅助下肺切除术的手术并发症发生率15%,手术死亡率由25年前的7%下降至0.8%[。其次,在标准POSSUM评分中一些与专科手术相关的参数并未纳入,以肝胆胰手术为例血清胆红素水平并未纳入在标准POSSUM评分中,也使得其预测率不准确[。在本研究中,我们根据Logistic回归分析结果,将肺通气指标FEV1%和肺弥散功能指标DLCO%及胸腔感染指标纳入改良POSSUM评分中,与标准POSSUM评分相比,其在术后并发症的预测上有更好的价值,两者AUC比较差异有统计学意义(P < 0.05)。但也应看到即使是改良POSSUM对手术死亡仍存在过度预测。 尽管手术治疗是老年早期NSCLC的首选治疗方法[,但是年龄仍是老年肺癌手术死亡的独立危险因素,一项3, 000例老年肺癌死亡率的调查显示[与年青人相比,30 d、60 d、90 d手术死亡率分别为3.6% vs 2.2%;4.1% vs 2.4%;4.7% vs 2.5%。但是结果不尽相同,Rivera[报道年龄与住院时间及术后并发症发生率无关。在本研究中,通过Logistic回归分析,年龄与术后并发症发生和手术死亡均相关。并且肿瘤TNM分期也与术后并发症发生率相关,这可能因为不同的TNM分期患者手术时间、手术方式、手术范围包括肺门纵隔淋巴结清扫的程度不同,直接影响到术后并发症的发生。值得提出的是目前NSCLC Ⅳ期的老年患者并不建议手术治疗,故本研究中并未纳入合并全身转移的老年NSCLC患者。 在我们的研究中,手术并发症和手术死亡与手术时间、手术方式及肿瘤的病理分型无关,这与国内的报道并不一致,杨等[报道手术时间是肺癌术后并发症发生和手术死亡的危险因素。分析原因本研究中多数患者采用的是胸腔镜辅助下的肺切除术,手术时间大多在2 h-3 h,大大降低了因手术时间过长,单侧肺通气时间长而造成的患侧肺萎陷、健侧肺过度通气带来的通气/血流比例失调。而马等[报道手术方式与肺癌术后并发症发生相关,也与本研究不一致。本研究中不同的手术方式,对术后并发症及手术死亡并无影响。由于国外文献[报道全肺切除术可以使老年患者围术期并发症发生率及病死率增高,应尽量避免。故本研究在手术方式的选择上无全肺切除术。虽有回顾性报道[肺局限性切除术与肺叶切除术相比,术后生存期相当,但会有更好的肺功能。但本研究的观察时间仅局限在术后30 d内,由于观察时间较短不同手术方式所致的肺功能差异可能并未显现。 总之,改良POSSUM评分对老年NSCLC术后并发症发生有较好的预测价值,可为决策手术治疗提供依据。
  17 in total

1.  Sublobar resection provides an equivalent survival after lobectomy in elderly patients with early lung cancer.

Authors:  Jiro Okami; Yuri Ito; Masahiko Higashiyama; Tomio Nakayama; Toshiteru Tokunaga; Jun Maeda; Ken Kodama
Journal:  Ann Thorac Surg       Date:  2010-11       Impact factor: 4.330

Review 2.  In elderly patients with lung cancer is resection justified in terms of morbidity, mortality and residual quality of life?

Authors:  Anthony Chambers; Tom Routledge; John Pilling; Marco Scarci
Journal:  Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg       Date:  2010-03-30

3.  Randomized trial of lobectomy versus limited resection for T1 N0 non-small cell lung cancer. Lung Cancer Study Group.

Authors:  R J Ginsberg; L V Rubinstein
Journal:  Ann Thorac Surg       Date:  1995-09       Impact factor: 4.330

4.  Pneumonectomy vs. sleeve resection for non-small cell lung carcinoma in the elderly: analysis of short-term and long-term results.

Authors:  S Bölükbas; M H Eberlein; J Schirren
Journal:  Thorac Cardiovasc Surg       Date:  2011-04-08       Impact factor: 1.827

5.  A model for national outcome audit in vascular surgery.

Authors:  D R Prytherch; B M Ridler; J D Beard; J J Earnshaw
Journal:  Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg       Date:  2001-06       Impact factor: 7.069

6.  EORTC elderly task force position paper: approach to the older cancer patient.

Authors:  A G Pallis; C Fortpied; U Wedding; M C Van Nes; B Penninckx; A Ring; D Lacombe; S Monfardini; P Scalliet; H Wildiers
Journal:  Eur J Cancer       Date:  2010-03-12       Impact factor: 9.162

7.  Video-assisted thoracic surgery lobectomy: experience with 1,100 cases.

Authors:  Robert J McKenna; Ward Houck; Clark Beeman Fuller
Journal:  Ann Thorac Surg       Date:  2006-02       Impact factor: 4.330

8.  Surgical management and outcomes of elderly patients with early stage non-small cell lung cancer: a nested case-control study.

Authors:  Caroline Rivera; Pierre-Emmanuel Falcoz; Alain Bernard; Pascal A Thomas; Marcel Dahan
Journal:  Chest       Date:  2011-03-24       Impact factor: 9.410

Review 9.  A systematic review of POSSUM and its related models as predictors of post-operative mortality and morbidity in patients undergoing surgery for colorectal cancer.

Authors:  Colin Hewitt Richards; Fiona E Leitch; Paul G Horgan; Donald C McMillan
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2010-09-08       Impact factor: 3.452

10.  Elderly patients with advanced NSCLC in phase III clinical trials: are the elderly excluded from practice-changing trials in advanced NSCLC?

Authors:  Adrian G Sacher; Lisa W Le; Natasha B Leighl; Linda E Coate
Journal:  J Thorac Oncol       Date:  2013-03       Impact factor: 15.609

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.