中华肿瘤杂志
中華腫瘤雜誌
중화종류잡지
Chinese Journal of Oncology
2015年
10期
753-758
,共6页
刘宁波%崔建功%张增强%赵智成%李卫东%付蔚华
劉寧波%崔建功%張增彊%趙智成%李衛東%付蔚華
류저파%최건공%장증강%조지성%리위동%부위화
胃肿瘤%死亡率%手术后并发症%生理能力与手术应激评分系统%改良生理能力与手术应激评分系统
胃腫瘤%死亡率%手術後併髮癥%生理能力與手術應激評分繫統%改良生理能力與手術應激評分繫統
위종류%사망솔%수술후병발증%생리능력여수술응격평분계통%개량생리능력여수술응격평분계통
Stomach neoplasms%Mortality%Postoperative complications%Estimation of physiologic ability and surgical stress%Modified estimation of physiologic ability and surgical stress
目的:探讨生理能力与手术应激评分系统( E?PASS)和改良的生理能力与手术应激评分系统( mE?PASS)预测胃癌患者术后死亡率的价值及其相关参数与术后并发症的关系。方法收集2010年l月至2014年1月行手术切除的778例胃癌患者的临床资料,应用E?PASS和mE?PASS评分系统预测胃癌患者术后的死亡率,应用受试者工作特征( ROC)曲线和拟合优度检验评价E?PASS和mE?PASS评分系统预测术后死亡率的效率,应用非条件Logistic回归分析评价E?PASS评分系统的相关参数与胃癌患者术后并发症的关系。结果 E?PASS和mE?PASS评分系统预测死亡组和非死亡组的死亡率差异均有统计学意义(均P<0.05)。 E?PASS和mE?PASS评分系统预测胃癌术后死亡率风险的ROC曲线下面积分别为0.926和0.878。 E?PASS和mE?PASS评分系统预测胃癌患者术后死亡率的ROC曲线拟合优度检验差异均无统计学意义(均P>0.05)。单因素分析显示,年龄、手术时间、严重心脏病、严重肺病、糖尿病、体能状态分级和美国麻醉医师协会( ASA)分级为影响胃癌患者术后早期并发症的因素(均P<0.05);非条件Logistic回归分析结果显示,糖尿病、严重肺病、ASA分级和手术时间为影响胃癌患者术后并发症的独立因素(均P<0.05)。结论 E?PASS和mE?PASS评分系统预测胃癌患者术后死亡率与实际死亡率具有较好的一致性,均适用于临床。与E?PASS评分系统比较, mE?PASS评分系统简化了术中参数。严重肺病、糖尿病、手术时间和ASA分级为影响胃癌患者术后并发症的独立危险因素。
目的:探討生理能力與手術應激評分繫統( E?PASS)和改良的生理能力與手術應激評分繫統( mE?PASS)預測胃癌患者術後死亡率的價值及其相關參數與術後併髮癥的關繫。方法收集2010年l月至2014年1月行手術切除的778例胃癌患者的臨床資料,應用E?PASS和mE?PASS評分繫統預測胃癌患者術後的死亡率,應用受試者工作特徵( ROC)麯線和擬閤優度檢驗評價E?PASS和mE?PASS評分繫統預測術後死亡率的效率,應用非條件Logistic迴歸分析評價E?PASS評分繫統的相關參數與胃癌患者術後併髮癥的關繫。結果 E?PASS和mE?PASS評分繫統預測死亡組和非死亡組的死亡率差異均有統計學意義(均P<0.05)。 E?PASS和mE?PASS評分繫統預測胃癌術後死亡率風險的ROC麯線下麵積分彆為0.926和0.878。 E?PASS和mE?PASS評分繫統預測胃癌患者術後死亡率的ROC麯線擬閤優度檢驗差異均無統計學意義(均P>0.05)。單因素分析顯示,年齡、手術時間、嚴重心髒病、嚴重肺病、糖尿病、體能狀態分級和美國痳醉醫師協會( ASA)分級為影響胃癌患者術後早期併髮癥的因素(均P<0.05);非條件Logistic迴歸分析結果顯示,糖尿病、嚴重肺病、ASA分級和手術時間為影響胃癌患者術後併髮癥的獨立因素(均P<0.05)。結論 E?PASS和mE?PASS評分繫統預測胃癌患者術後死亡率與實際死亡率具有較好的一緻性,均適用于臨床。與E?PASS評分繫統比較, mE?PASS評分繫統簡化瞭術中參數。嚴重肺病、糖尿病、手術時間和ASA分級為影響胃癌患者術後併髮癥的獨立危險因素。
목적:탐토생리능력여수술응격평분계통( E?PASS)화개량적생리능력여수술응격평분계통( mE?PASS)예측위암환자술후사망솔적개치급기상관삼수여술후병발증적관계。방법수집2010년l월지2014년1월행수술절제적778례위암환자적림상자료,응용E?PASS화mE?PASS평분계통예측위암환자술후적사망솔,응용수시자공작특정( ROC)곡선화의합우도검험평개E?PASS화mE?PASS평분계통예측술후사망솔적효솔,응용비조건Logistic회귀분석평개E?PASS평분계통적상관삼수여위암환자술후병발증적관계。결과 E?PASS화mE?PASS평분계통예측사망조화비사망조적사망솔차이균유통계학의의(균P<0.05)。 E?PASS화mE?PASS평분계통예측위암술후사망솔풍험적ROC곡선하면적분별위0.926화0.878。 E?PASS화mE?PASS평분계통예측위암환자술후사망솔적ROC곡선의합우도검험차이균무통계학의의(균P>0.05)。단인소분석현시,년령、수술시간、엄중심장병、엄중폐병、당뇨병、체능상태분급화미국마취의사협회( ASA)분급위영향위암환자술후조기병발증적인소(균P<0.05);비조건Logistic회귀분석결과현시,당뇨병、엄중폐병、ASA분급화수술시간위영향위암환자술후병발증적독립인소(균P<0.05)。결론 E?PASS화mE?PASS평분계통예측위암환자술후사망솔여실제사망솔구유교호적일치성,균괄용우림상。여E?PASS평분계통비교, mE?PASS평분계통간화료술중삼수。엄중폐병、당뇨병、수술시간화ASA분급위영향위암환자술후병발증적독립위험인소。
Objective To investigate the clinical value of Physiologic Ability and Surgical Stress ( E?PASS) and modified Estimation of Physiologic Ability and Surgical Stress ( mE?PASS) scoring systems in predicting the mortality and surgical risk of gastric cancer patients, and to analyze the relationship between the parameters of E?PASS and early postoperative complications. Methods Clinical data of 778 gastric cancer patients who underwent elective surgical resection in Tianjin Medical University General Hospital from Jan. 2010 to Jan. 2014 were analyzed retrospectively. E?PASS and mE?PASS scoring systems were used to predict the mortality of gastric cancer patients, respectively. Univariate and unconditioned logistic regression analyses were performed to assess the relationships between nine parameters of E?PASS system and early postoperative complications. Results E?PASS and mE?PASS systems were used to predict the mortality in the death group and non?death group. The Z value was -5. 067 and -4. 492, respectively, showing a significant difference between the two groups (P<0.05). AUCs of mortality predicted by E?PASS and mE?PASS were 0.926 and 0.878 (P>0.05), and the prediction calibration of postoperative mortality showed statistically non?significant difference (P>0.05) between the E?PASS and mE?PASS prediction and actual mortality. Univariate analysis showed that age, operation time, severe heart disease, severe lung disease, diabetes mellitus, physical state index and ASA classification score are related to postoperative complications <br> ( P<0. 05 for all ) . Unconditioned logistic regression analysis showed that severe lung disease, diabetes mellitus, ASA classification score and operation time are risk factors for early postoperative complications ( P<0.05 for all) . Conclusions Both mE?PASS and E?PASS scoring system have good consistency in the predicting postoperative mortality and actual mortality, and both are suitable for clinical application. Moreover, the mE?PASS scoring system is clinically more simple and convenient than E?PASS scoring system. Preoperative severe lung disease, diabetes mellitus, ASA classification score and operation time are independent factors affecting the early postoperative complications.