| Literature DB >> 34164495 |
Le Luo1,2, Yutong Yao2, Haotian Liao1, Jiwei Huang1, Mingheng Liao1, Jinju Wang1, Kefei Yuan1, Yong Zeng1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There is currently no preoperative risk assessment system for predicting complications after radical resection of hilar cholangiocarcinoma. This study examined the association between the cumulative damage effect of jaundice (CDEJ) and the complications of radical resection of Bismuth II or above hilar cholangiocarcinoma.Entities:
Keywords: Klatskin tumor; jaundice; obstructive; postoperative complications; risk assessment
Year: 2021 PMID: 34164495 PMCID: PMC8184487 DOI: 10.21037/atm-21-1860
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Ann Transl Med ISSN: 2305-5839
Figure 1Simulated diagram of changes in jaundice.
Baseline characteristics, univariate analysis between patients with or without complications, and multivariate logistic analysis for the incidence of complications
| Variable | Univariate | Multivariate | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| No complications (n=56) | Complications (n=115) | P | OR | 95%CI | P | ||
| Age, median (Q1, Q3), year | 60 (50.3–63) | 59 (53–64) | 0.479 | ||||
| Gender, n (%) | 0.719 | ||||||
| Male | 31 (55.4) | 67 (58.3) | |||||
| Female | 25 (44.6) | 48 (41.7) | |||||
| BMI, mean ± SD | 21.54±2.37 | 22.28±2.52 | 0.069 | ||||
| Cholangitis, n (%) | 3 (5.4) | 29 (25.2) | 0.002 | 9.638 | 2.683–34.622 | 0.001 | |
| Preoperative bilirubin, median (Q1, Q3) | 156.25 (80.03–223.2) | 194.2 (141.7–278.3) | 0.002 | 1.006 | 1.002–1.01 | 0.004 | |
| Preoperative albumin protein, median (Q1, Q3) | 37.85 (35.68–40.38) | 36.4 (33.9–39.1) | 0.014 | 0.949 | 0.866–1.039 | 0.257 | |
| FLR, median (Q1, Q3) | 63.5 (53.25–73) | 65 (47–74) | 0.967 | ||||
| LRF, median (Q1, Q3) | 0 (0–0.03) | 0 (0–0.02) | 0.46 | ||||
| CDEJ, median (Q1, Q3) | 1,587.58 (709.34–3,108.9) | 3,057.3 (1,563.6–5,767.1) | <0.001 | 1.0001 | 1.000027–1.000239 | 0.014 | |
P<0.05, indicated statistic significant. BMI, body mass index; FLR, future liver remnant; LRF, liver reserve function; CDEJ, cumulative damage effect of jaundice.
Univariate and multivariate analysis for hepatic failure
| Variable | Univariate | Multivariate | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| No hepatic failure (n=132) | Hepatic failure (n=39) | P | OR | 95% CI | P | ||
| Age, median (Q1, Q3), year | 59 (50–63) | 63 (58–65) | 0.008 | 1.083 | 1.029–1.14 | 0.002 | |
| Gender, n (%) | 0.329 | ||||||
| Male | 73 (55.3) | 25 (64.1) | |||||
| Female | 59 (44.7) | 14 (35.9) | |||||
| BMI, mean ± SD | 21.88±2.44 | 22.59±2.62 | 0.117 | ||||
| Cholangitis, n (%) | 22 (16.7) | 10 (25.6) | 0.207 | ||||
| Preoperative bilirubin, median (Q1, Q3) | 172.65 (101.13–258.05) | 235.5 (160.3–311.3) | 0.009 | 1.008 | 1.004–1.012 | <0.001 | |
| Preoperative albumin protein, median (Q1, Q3) | 37.3 (34.38–39.6) | 36.7 (34–39.1) | 0.504 | ||||
| FLR, median (Q1, Q3) | 65 (55.25–73) | 61 (36–75) | 0.079* | 0.963 | 0.941–0.986 | 0.002 | |
| LRF, median (Q1, Q3) | 0 (0–0.03) | 0 (0–0.02) | 0.381 | ||||
| CDEJ, median (Q1, Q3) | 2,260 (1,320.13–4,937.64) | 3,944.9 (1,548.3–7,061.5) | 0.046 | 1.0001 | 1.00001–1.00019 | 0.024 | |
P<0.05 indicated statistic significant. *, although the P>0.05, considering its great clinical significance, the single-factor Logistic test was performed and with P<0.05.BMI, body mass index; FLR, future liver remnant; LRF, liver reserve function; CDEJ, cumulative damage effect of jaundice.
Figure 2Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve predicting the incidence of complications and hepatic failure. (A) ROC curve for incidence of complications; when the optimal cutoff was 2,151 for the cumulative damage effect of jaundice (CDEJ), the sensitivity was 66.09%, the specificity was 69.64%, and the area under the curve (AUC) was 0.69 (95% CI =0.615–0.759). When the optimal cutoff for preoperative bilirubin was 111.7 µmol/L, the sensitivity was 84.35%, the specificity was 42.86%, and the AUC was 0.65 (95% CI =0.573–0.721). (B) ROC curve for hepatic failure. When the optimal cutoff was 3,931.95 for CDEJ, the sensitivity was 51.28%, the specificity was 70.45%, and the AUC was 0.605 (95% CI =0.582–0.679). When the optimal cutoff for preoperative bilirubin was 115.9µmol/L, the sensitivity was 92.31%, the specificity was 32.58%, and AUC was 0.638 (95% CI =0.561–0.71). When the optimal cutoff for age was 50 years, the sensitivity was 97.44%, the specificity was 27.27%, and AUC was 0.64 (95% CI =0.563–0.712). When the optimal cutoff for FLR was 50, the sensitivity was 48.72%, the specificity was 78.79%, and AUC was 0.638 (95% CI =0.515–0.667).
Figure 3Nomogram for predicting incidence of complications and calibration plot. (A) The nomogram maps the predicted probability of the incidence of complications on a scale of 0 to 240. With 50% as the cutoff point, a score of greater than 59 points indicates that the patient will have complications. The prediction accuracy (c-index) of the above scoring system is 80.04% (95% CI =78.23–81.91%). (B) Calibration curves of the nomogram.
Figure 4Nomogram for predicting hepatic failure and calibration plot. (A) The nomogram maps the predicted probability of hepatic failure on a scale of 0 to 280. With 50% as the cutoff point, a score of greater than 228 points indicates that the patient will have hepatic failure. The prediction accuracy (c-index) of the above scoring system is 80.75% (95% CI =77.33–82.51%). (B) Calibration curves of the nomogram.