Shun-Wen Hsueh1, Keng-Hao Liu2, Chia-Yen Hung3,4, Chun-Yi Tsai2, Jun-Te Hsu2, Ngan-Ming Tsang5, William Harrison Hsueh6, Chieh Yang7, Wen-Chi Chou8. 1. Department of Oncology, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital at Keelung, Keelung, Taiwan, R.O.C. 2. Department of Surgery, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital at Linkou and College of Medicine, Chang Gung University, Taoyuan, Taiwan, R.O.C. 3. Department of Hematology and Oncology, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital at Linkou and College of Medicine, Chang Gung University, Taoyuan, Taiwan, R.O.C. 4. Division of Hema-oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, Mackay Memorial Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan, R.O.C. 5. Department of Radiation Oncology, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital at Linkou and College of Medicine, Chang Gung University, Taoyuan, Taiwan, R.O.C. 6. School of Medicine, National Defense Medical Center, Taipei, Taiwan, R.O.C. 7. Department of Internal Medicine, En-Hua Hospital, New Taipei City, Taiwan, R.O.C. 8. Department of Hematology and Oncology, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital at Linkou and College of Medicine, Chang Gung University, Taoyuan, Taiwan, R.O.C. f12986@cgmh.org.tw.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/AIM: We compared the adequacy of five nutrition assessment tools with respect to their predictive value in patients with locally advanced gastric cancer (GC) receiving radical surgery. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Five nutrition assessment tools-Glasgow prognostic score (GPS), malnutritional universal screening tool (MUST), nutritional risk screening, patient generated subjective global assessment (PG-SGA), and prognostic nutritional index (PNI)-were assessed preoperatively for stage III GC patients. The correlation between postoperative events and nutritional status was further analyzed. RESULTS: Most of the nutritional tools accurately predicted length of hospital stay and grade 3 or higher surgical complications, while only the GPS correlated with 30-day readmission and surgical complications. The PG-SGA performed the poorest among the five tools and failed to predict any postoperative event. CONCLUSION: The application of GPS is recommended as a prognostic index for patients with locally advanced GC prior to radical surgery. Copyright
BACKGROUND/AIM: We compared the adequacy of five nutrition assessment tools with respect to their predictive value in patients with locally advanced gastric cancer (GC) receiving radical surgery. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Five nutrition assessment tools-Glasgow prognostic score (GPS), malnutritional universal screening tool (MUST), nutritional risk screening, patient generated subjective global assessment (PG-SGA), and prognostic nutritional index (PNI)-were assessed preoperatively for stage III GC patients. The correlation between postoperative events and nutritional status was further analyzed. RESULTS: Most of the nutritional tools accurately predicted length of hospital stay and grade 3 or higher surgical complications, while only the GPS correlated with 30-day readmission and surgical complications. The PG-SGA performed the poorest among the five tools and failed to predict any postoperative event. CONCLUSION: The application of GPS is recommended as a prognostic index for patients with locally advanced GC prior to radical surgery. Copyright