Jennifer L Saluk1, Robert H Blackwell2,3, William S Gange1, Matthew A C Zapf1,3, Anai N Kothari3,4, Paul C Kuo3,4, Marcus L Quek2, Robert C Flanigan2,3, Gopal N Gupta2,3. 1. Stritch School of Medicine, Loyola University of Chicago, Maywood, IL, USA. 2. Department of Urology, Loyola University Medical Center, Maywood, IL, USA. 3. Department of One: MAP Division of Clinical Informatics and Analytics, Loyola University Medical Center, Maywood, IL, USA. 4. Department of Surgery, Loyola University Medical Center, Maywood, IL, USA.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Radical cystectomy for bladder cancer is associated with high rates of readmission. We investigated the LACE score, a validated prediction tool for readmission and mortality, in the radical cystectomy population. MATERIALS & METHODS: Patients who underwent radical cystectomy for bladder cancer were identified by ICD-9 codes from the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project State Inpatient Database for California years 2007-2010. The LACE score was calculated as previously described, with components of L: length of stay, A: acuity of admission, C: comorbidity, and E: number of emergency department visits within 6 months preceding surgery. RESULTS: Of 3,470 radical cystectomy patients, 638 (18.4%) experienced 90-day readmission, and 160 (4.6%) 90-day mortality. At a previously validated "high-risk" LACE score ≥ 10, patients experienced an increased risk of 90-day readmission (22.8 vs. 17.7%, p = 0.002) and mortality (9.1 vs. 3.5%, p < 0.001). On adjusted multivariable analysis, "high risk" patients by LACE score had increased 90-day odds of readmission (adjusted OR = 1.24, 95% CI: 0.99-1.54, p = 0.050) and mortality (adjusted OR = 2.09, 95% CI: 1.47-2.99, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The LACE score reasonably identifies patients at risk for 90-day mortality following radical cystectomy, but only poorly predicts readmission. Providers may use the LACE score to target high-risk patients for closer follow-up or intervention.
INTRODUCTION: Radical cystectomy for bladder cancer is associated with high rates of readmission. We investigated the LACE score, a validated prediction tool for readmission and mortality, in the radical cystectomy population. MATERIALS & METHODS: Patients who underwent radical cystectomy for bladder cancer were identified by ICD-9 codes from the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project State Inpatient Database for California years 2007-2010. The LACE score was calculated as previously described, with components of L: length of stay, A: acuity of admission, C: comorbidity, and E: number of emergency department visits within 6 months preceding surgery. RESULTS: Of 3,470 radical cystectomy patients, 638 (18.4%) experienced 90-day readmission, and 160 (4.6%) 90-day mortality. At a previously validated "high-risk" LACE score ≥ 10, patients experienced an increased risk of 90-day readmission (22.8 vs. 17.7%, p = 0.002) and mortality (9.1 vs. 3.5%, p < 0.001). On adjusted multivariable analysis, "high risk" patients by LACE score had increased 90-day odds of readmission (adjusted OR = 1.24, 95% CI: 0.99-1.54, p = 0.050) and mortality (adjusted OR = 2.09, 95% CI: 1.47-2.99, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The LACE score reasonably identifies patients at risk for 90-day mortality following radical cystectomy, but only poorly predicts readmission. Providers may use the LACE score to target high-risk patients for closer follow-up or intervention.
Authors: C J Stimson; Sam S Chang; Daniel A Barocas; John E Humphrey; Sanjay G Patel; Peter E Clark; Joseph A Smith; Michael S Cookson Journal: J Urol Date: 2010-08-17 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Marianne Schmid; H Abraham Chiang; Akshay Sood; Logan Campbell; Felix K-H Chun; Deepansh Dalela; James Okwara; Jesse D Sammon; Adam S Kibel; Mani Menon; Margit Fisch; Quoc-Dien Trinh Journal: Urol Oncol Date: 2015-12-23 Impact factor: 3.498
Authors: J Schiffmann; G Gandaglia; A Larcher; M Sun; Z Tian; S F Shariat; M McCormack; L Valiquette; F Montorsi; M Graefen; F Saad; P I Karakiewicz Journal: Eur J Surg Oncol Date: 2014-10-15 Impact factor: 4.424
Authors: Meera R Chappidi; Max Kates; Hiten D Patel; Jeffrey J Tosoian; Deborah R Kaye; Nikolai A Sopko; Danny Lascano; Jen-Jane Liu; James McKiernan; Trinity J Bivalacqua Journal: Urol Oncol Date: 2016-02-15 Impact factor: 3.498
Authors: Naveen Krishnan; Xiang Liu; Mariel S Lavieri; Michael Hu; Alexander Helfand; Benjamin Li; Jonathan E Helm; Chang He; Brent K Hollenbeck; Ted A Skolarus; Bruce L Jacobs Journal: J Urol Date: 2015-12-10 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Carl van Walraven; Irfan A Dhalla; Chaim Bell; Edward Etchells; Ian G Stiell; Kelly Zarnke; Peter C Austin; Alan J Forster Journal: CMAJ Date: 2010-03-01 Impact factor: 8.262
Authors: Ifeanyichukwu I Megwalu; Anna Vlahiotis; Mohamed Radwan; Jay F Piccirillo; Adam S Kibel Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2007-11-05 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Stephen A Boorjian; Simon P Kim; Matthew K Tollefson; Alonso Carrasco; John C Cheville; R Houston Thompson; Prabin Thapa; Igor Frank Journal: J Urol Date: 2013-01-09 Impact factor: 7.450