| Literature DB >> 33992090 |
Jian Shen1, Feng Guo1, Yan Sun1, Jingyuan Zhao1, Jin Hu2, Zunxiang Ke3, Yushun Zhang1, Xin Jin4, Heshui Wu5.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) represents the most common complication following pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD). Predictive models are needed to select patients with a high risk of POPF. This study was aimed to establish an effective predictive nomogram for POPF following PD.Entities:
Keywords: Albumin; BMI; Drain amylase value; Pancreatic texture; Risk factors
Year: 2021 PMID: 33992090 PMCID: PMC8126152 DOI: 10.1186/s12885-021-08201-z
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Cancer ISSN: 1471-2407 Impact factor: 4.430
Clinicopathological characteristics of patients (n = 459)
| Variables | Training Cohort | Validation Cohort | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total ( | POPF ( | No-POPF ( | |||
| Age (years) | 56.47 ± 11.17 | 56.74 ± 11.94 | 56.42 ± 11.03 | 57.42 ± 10.77 | 0.380 |
| BMI (kg/m2) | 22.39 ± 2.78 | 23.39 ± 2.78 | 22.21 ± 2.75 | 22.34 ± 3.02 | 0.873 |
| Sex | 0.763 | ||||
| Female | 121 | 18 | 103 | 60 | |
| Male | 181 | 32 | 149 | 97 | |
| Smoking | 0.999 | ||||
| Yes | 92 | 16 | 76 | 48 | |
| No | 210 | 34 | 176 | 109 | |
| Drinking | 0.128 | ||||
| Yes | 76 | 12 | 64 | 29 | |
| No | 226 | 38 | 188 | 128 | |
| Biliary drainage | 0.403 | ||||
| Yes | 31 | 3 | 28 | 12 | |
| No | 271 | 47 | 224 | 145 | |
| Diabetes | 0.183 | ||||
| Yes | 43 | 3 | 40 | 15 | |
| No | 259 | 47 | 212 | 142 | |
| Hypertension | 0.362 | ||||
| Yes | 55 | 8 | 47 | 23 | |
| No | 247 | 42 | 205 | 134 | |
| Epigastric operation history | 0.704 | ||||
| Yes | 57 | 13 | 44 | 27 | |
| No | 245 | 37 | 208 | 130 | |
| Total bilirubin (μmol/L) | 28.80 (14.75–148.10) | 35.00 (10.20–168.13) | 26.70 (13.13–147.85) | 17.80 (10.85–151.20) | 0.204 |
| Albumin (g/L) | 39.16 ± 3.82 | 39.90 ± 3.98 | 39.02 ± 3.73 | 39.51 ± 4.41 | 0.369 |
| White blood cell (1012/L) | 5.77 ± 1.60 | 5.76 ± 1.48 | 5.77 ± 1.61 | 5.75 ± 1.83 | 0.927 |
| Platelet count (109/L) | 231.12 ± 84.20 | 239.12 ± 99.49 | 229.53 ± 89.95 | 242.77 ± 77.58 | 0.149 |
| Operative time (min) | 0.768 | ||||
| > 300 min | 144 | 27 | 117 | 72 | |
| ≤ 300 min | 158 | 23 | 135 | 85 | |
| Pancreas duct size | 0.555 | ||||
| > 3 mm | 160 | 31 | 111 | 79 | |
| ≤ 3 mm | 142 | 19 | 141 | 18 | |
| Surgical procedure | 0.526 | ||||
| Minimally invasive | 58 | 9 | 49 | 26 | |
| Laparotomy | 224 | 41 | 203 | 131 | |
| Pancreas texture | 0.768 | ||||
| Soft | 141 | 33 | 108 | 71 | |
| Hard | 161 | 17 | 144 | 86 | |
| Pathology | 0.207 | ||||
| Malignant tumour | 212 | 29 | 183 | 101 | |
| Other | 90 | 21 | 69 | 56 | |
| Tumour location | 0.605 | ||||
| Pancreatic head | 222 | 35 | 187 | 126 | |
| Duodenal papilla | 35 | 6 | 29 | 13 | |
| Distal bile duct | 19 | 3 | 16 | 8 | |
| Ampulla | 19 | 5 | 14 | 8 | |
| Other | 7 | 1 | 6 | 2 | |
| Data on POD 1 | |||||
| White blood cell (1012/L) | 12.97 ± 4.00 | 12.41 ± 4.43 | 13.08 ± 3.91 | 13.16 ± 4.23 | 0.636 |
| Platelet count (109/L) | 180.03 ± 60.57 | 169.68 ± 58.15 | 182.08 ± 60.95 | 187.15 ± 64.74 | 0.244 |
| AD (g/L) | 10.81 ± 4.22 | 12.94 ± 4.65 | 10.39 ± 4.00 | 10.77 ± 4.13 | 0.913 |
| Drain amylase value (U/L) | 243.5 (54.00–1436.8) | 932.5 (347.00.00–6091.00) | 169.50 (43.25–984.75) | 242.00 (49.00–1502.00) | 0.907 |
Multivariate analysis of predictors of POPF (n = 302)
| Variables | β | OR | 95% CI | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Albumin difference (change per 5 points) | 0.61 | 1.83 | 1.30–2.59 | 0.001 |
| Drain amylase value (change per 5000 points) | 0.29 | 1.33 | 1.06–1.68 | 0.015 |
| BMI | 0.11 | 1.15 | 1.03–1.29 | 0.014 |
| Pancreas texture (soft) | 0.91 | 2.47 | 1.26–4.85 | 0.008 |
Fig. 1The predictive nomogram of postoperative pancreatic fistula
Fig. 2The ROC curve and calibration curve of the nomogram
Predictive value of the nomogram and the a-FRS
| Models | AUC | 95% CI | Sensitivity | Specificity | PPV | NPV | Accuracy | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nomogram | 0.87 | 0.81–0.94 | < 0.001 | 81.25% | 76.00% | 46.43% | 94.06% | 77.07% |
| a-FRS | 0.62 | 0.52–0.73 | 65.63% | 51.20% | 25.61% | 85.33% | 54.14% |
PPV negative predictive value, NPV positive predictive value, a-FRS alternative fistula risk score. *the AUC of nomogram vs the AUC of a-FRS