Defining pneumonia after esophagectomy for cancer: validation of the Uniform Pneumonia Score in a high volume center in North America

被引:20
作者
Seesing, M. F. J. [1 ]
Wirsching, A. [2 ]
van Rossum, P. S. N. [1 ,3 ]
Weijs, T. J. [1 ]
Ruurda, J. P. [1 ]
van Hillegersberg, R. [1 ]
Low, D. E. [2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Med Ctr Utrecht, Dept Surg Oncol, Utrecht, Netherlands
[2] Virginia Mason Med Ctr, Dept Thorac Surg & Thorac Oncol, 1100 Ninth Ave, Seattle, WA 98111 USA
[3] Univ Med Ctr Utrecht, Dept Radiat Oncol, Utrecht, Netherlands
关键词
complications; esophageal cancer surgery; surgery; TRANSTHORACIC ESOPHAGECTOMY; COMPLICATIONS; OUTCOMES; MULTICENTER; DIAGNOSIS; MODEL; CARE;
D O I
10.1093/dote/doy002
中图分类号
R57 [消化系及腹部疾病];
学科分类号
摘要
Surgery is a central component of multimodality therapy for esophageal and gastroesophageal junction cancer. Pneumonia is a common sequela of esophagectomy, leading to an increase in intensive care unit stay, hospital stay, readmission rates, and postoperative mortality. Developing strategies to reduce pneumonia after esophagectomy is hampered by the absence of a standardized methodology for defining pneumonia. This study aims to validate the Uniform Pneumonia Score (UPS) in a high volume center in the USA. The UPS was developed to define pneumonia after esophagectomy for cancer and is based on the assessment of temperature (degrees C), leukocyte count (x10(9)/L), and pulmonary radiography. The UPS has been validated utilizing a prospective, Institutional Review Board approved database of esophageal cancer patients treated in a high volume esophagectomy center in the USA between 2010 and 2015. One hundred ninety-three consecutive patients were included and 21 (10.9%) were treated for pneumonia. The UPS was able to predict treatment for suspected pneumonia with a good sensitivity (85.7%, confidence interval (CI): 63.7%-96.7%), specificity (97.1%, CI: 93.4%-99.1%), positive predictive value (78.3%, CI: 59.9%-89.7%), and negative predictive value (98.2%, CI: 95.1%-99.4%). The diagnostic accuracy was 95.9%, CI: 92.0%-98.2%. The UPS demonstrated to be a reliable scoring system to define pneumonia after esophagectomy for cancer. Global application of this model will standardize the definition of pneumonia after esophagectomy. This will improve outcome reporting and comparisons of complications between individual institutions, clinical trials, and national audits.
引用
收藏
页数:8
相关论文
共 31 条
[1]   Nutritional route in oesophageal resection trial II (NUTRIENT II): study protocol for a multicentre open-label randomised controlled trial [J].
Berkelmans, Gijs H. K. ;
Wilts, Bas J. W. ;
Kouwenhoven, Ewout A. ;
Kumagai, Koshi ;
Nilsson, Magnus ;
Weijs, Teus J. ;
Nieuwenhuijzen, Grard A. P. ;
van Det, Marc J. ;
Luyer, Misha D. P. .
BMJ OPEN, 2016, 6 (08)
[2]   Minimally invasive versus open oesophagectomy for patients with oesophageal cancer: a multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled trial [J].
Biere, Surya S. A. Y. ;
Henegouwen, Mark I. van Berge ;
Maas, Kirsten W. ;
Bonavina, Luigi ;
Rosman, Camiel ;
Roig Garcia, Josep ;
Gisbertz, Suzanne S. ;
Klinkenbijl, Jean H. G. ;
Hollmann, Markus W. ;
de lange, Elly S. M. ;
Bonjer, H. Jaap ;
van der Peet, Donald L. ;
Cuesta, Miguel A. .
LANCET, 2012, 379 (9829) :1887-1892
[3]   Reporting of Short-Term Clinical Outcomes After Esophagectomy A Systematic Review [J].
Blencowe, Natalie S. ;
Strong, Sean ;
McNair, Angus G. K. ;
Brookes, Sara T. ;
Crosby, Tom ;
Griffin, S. Michael ;
Blazeby, Jane M. .
ANNALS OF SURGERY, 2012, 255 (04) :658-666
[4]   Open versus laparoscopically-assisted oesophagectomy for cancer: a multicentre randomised controlled phase III trial - the MIRO trial [J].
Briez, Nicolas ;
Piessen, Guillaume ;
Bonnetain, Franck ;
Brigand, Cecile ;
Carrere, Nicolas ;
Collet, Denis ;
Doddoli, Christophe ;
Flamein, Renaud ;
Mabrut, Jean-Yves ;
Meunier, Bernard ;
Msika, Simon ;
Perniceni, Thierry ;
Peschaud, Frederique ;
Prudhomme, Michel ;
Triboulet, Jean-Pierre ;
Mariette, Christophe .
BMC CANCER, 2011, 11
[5]   Early outcomes from the Dutch Upper Gastrointestinal Cancer Audit [J].
Busweiler, L. A. D. ;
Wijnhoven, B. P. L. ;
Henegouwen, M. I. van Berge ;
Henneman, D. ;
van Grieken, N. C. T. ;
Wouters, M. W. J. M. ;
van Hillegersberg, R. ;
van Sandick, J. W. .
BRITISH JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2016, 103 (13) :1855-1863
[6]   Severity Grading of Surgical Complications [J].
Clavien, Pierre A. ;
Strasberg, Steven M. .
ANNALS OF SURGERY, 2009, 250 (02) :197-198
[7]  
Collins GS, 2015, ANN INTERN MED, V162, P55, DOI [10.7326/M14-0697, 10.1136/bmj.g7594, 10.1002/bjs.9736, 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2014.11.010, 10.7326/M14-0698, 10.1016/j.eururo.2014.11.025, 10.1038/bjc.2014.639, 10.1186/s12916-014-0241-z]
[8]   Classification of surgical complications - A new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey [J].
Dindo, D ;
Demartines, N ;
Clavien, PA .
ANNALS OF SURGERY, 2004, 240 (02) :205-213
[9]   Enhanced Recovery for Esophagectomy A Systematic Review and Evidence-Based Guidelines [J].
Findlay, John M. ;
Gillies, Richard S. ;
Millo, Julian ;
Sgromo, Bruno ;
Marshall, Robert E. K. ;
Maynard, Nicholas D. .
ANNALS OF SURGERY, 2014, 259 (03) :413-431
[10]   Technical and perioperative outcomes of minimally invasive esophagectomy in the prone position [J].
Goldberg, Ross F. ;
Bowers, Steven P. ;
Parker, Michael ;
Stauffer, John A. ;
Asbun, Horacio J. ;
Smith, C. Daniel .
SURGICAL ENDOSCOPY AND OTHER INTERVENTIONAL TECHNIQUES, 2013, 27 (02) :553-557