Novel CABIN score outperforms other prognostic models in predicting in-hospital mortality after salvage transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunting.

Jake Krige, Eduard Jonas, Chanel Robinson, Steve Beningfield, Urda Kotze, Marc Bernon, Sean Burmeister, Christo Kloppers
{"title":"Novel CABIN score outperforms other prognostic models in predicting in-hospital mortality after salvage transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunting.","authors":"Jake Krige,&nbsp;Eduard Jonas,&nbsp;Chanel Robinson,&nbsp;Steve Beningfield,&nbsp;Urda Kotze,&nbsp;Marc Bernon,&nbsp;Sean Burmeister,&nbsp;Christo Kloppers","doi":"10.4291/wjgp.v14.i2.34","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) is now established as the salvage procedure of choice in patients who have uncontrolled or severe recurrent variceal bleeding despite optimal medical and endoscopic treatment.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>To analysis compared the performance of eight risk scores to predict in-hospital mortality after salvage TIPS (sTIPS) placement in patients with uncontrolled variceal bleeding after failed medical treatment and endoscopic intervention.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Baseline risk scores for the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) II, Bonn TIPS early mortality (BOTEM), Child-Pugh, Emory, FIPS, model for end-stage liver disease (MELD), MELD-Na, and a novel 5 category CABIN score incorporating Creatinine, Albumin, Bilirubin, INR and Na, were calculated before sTIPS. Concordance (C) statistics for predictive accuracy of in-hospital mortality of the eight scores were compared using area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Thirty-four patients (29 men, 5 women), median age 52 years (range 31-80) received sTIPS for uncontrolled (11) or refractory (23) bleeding between August 1991 and November 2020. Salvage TIPS controlled bleeding in 32 (94%) patients with recurrence in one. Ten (29%) patients died in hospital. All scoring systems had a significant association with in-hospital mortality (<i>P</i> < 0.05) on multivariate analysis. Based on in-hospital survival AUROC, the CABIN (0.967), APACHE II (0.948) and Emory (0.942) scores had the best capability predicting mortality compared to FIPS (0.892), BOTEM (0.877), MELD Na (0.865), Child-Pugh (0.802) and MELD (0.792).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The novel CABIN score had the best prediction capability with statistical superiority over seven other risk scores. Despite sTIPS, hospital mortality remains high and can be predicted by CABIN category B or C or CABIN scores > 10. Survival was 100% in CABIN A patients while mortality was 75% for CABIN B, 87.5% for CABIN C, and 83% for CABIN scores > 10.</p>","PeriodicalId":23760,"journal":{"name":"World Journal of Gastrointestinal Pathophysiology","volume":"14 2","pages":"34-45"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/0d/92/WJGP-14-34.PMC10074947.pdf","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"World Journal of Gastrointestinal Pathophysiology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4291/wjgp.v14.i2.34","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

Background: Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) is now established as the salvage procedure of choice in patients who have uncontrolled or severe recurrent variceal bleeding despite optimal medical and endoscopic treatment.

Aim: To analysis compared the performance of eight risk scores to predict in-hospital mortality after salvage TIPS (sTIPS) placement in patients with uncontrolled variceal bleeding after failed medical treatment and endoscopic intervention.

Methods: Baseline risk scores for the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) II, Bonn TIPS early mortality (BOTEM), Child-Pugh, Emory, FIPS, model for end-stage liver disease (MELD), MELD-Na, and a novel 5 category CABIN score incorporating Creatinine, Albumin, Bilirubin, INR and Na, were calculated before sTIPS. Concordance (C) statistics for predictive accuracy of in-hospital mortality of the eight scores were compared using area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) analysis.

Results: Thirty-four patients (29 men, 5 women), median age 52 years (range 31-80) received sTIPS for uncontrolled (11) or refractory (23) bleeding between August 1991 and November 2020. Salvage TIPS controlled bleeding in 32 (94%) patients with recurrence in one. Ten (29%) patients died in hospital. All scoring systems had a significant association with in-hospital mortality (P < 0.05) on multivariate analysis. Based on in-hospital survival AUROC, the CABIN (0.967), APACHE II (0.948) and Emory (0.942) scores had the best capability predicting mortality compared to FIPS (0.892), BOTEM (0.877), MELD Na (0.865), Child-Pugh (0.802) and MELD (0.792).

Conclusion: The novel CABIN score had the best prediction capability with statistical superiority over seven other risk scores. Despite sTIPS, hospital mortality remains high and can be predicted by CABIN category B or C or CABIN scores > 10. Survival was 100% in CABIN A patients while mortality was 75% for CABIN B, 87.5% for CABIN C, and 83% for CABIN scores > 10.

Abstract Image

新的CABIN评分在预测抢救性经颈静脉肝内门静脉系统分流术后住院死亡率方面优于其他预后模型。
背景:经颈静脉肝内门静脉系统分流术(TIPS)目前已被确定为不受控制或严重复发性静脉曲张出血患者的抢救手术选择,尽管有最佳的药物和内镜治疗。目的:分析比较8种风险评分的表现,以预测药物治疗和内镜干预失败后静脉曲张出血患者置放补救性TIPS (sTIPS)后的住院死亡率。方法:在sTIPS前计算急性生理和慢性健康评估(APACHE) II、波恩TIPS早期死亡率(BOTEM)、Child-Pugh、Emory、FIPS、终末期肝病模型(MELD)、MELD-Na的基线风险评分,以及包含肌酐、白蛋白、胆红素、INR和Na的新型5类CABIN评分。采用受试者工作特征曲线下面积(AUROC)分析比较8个评分对院内死亡率预测准确性的一致性统计(C)。结果:1991年8月至2020年11月期间,34例患者(男性29例,女性5例),中位年龄52岁(31-80岁),因无法控制(11例)或难治性(23例)出血接受sTIPS治疗。救助性TIPS控制了32例(94%)复发患者的出血。10例(29%)患者在医院死亡。多因素分析显示,各评分系统与住院死亡率均有显著相关性(P < 0.05)。基于院内生存AUROC评分,与FIPS(0.892)、BOTEM(0.877)、MELD Na(0.865)、Child-Pugh(0.802)和MELD(0.792)相比,CABIN(0.967)、APACHE II(0.948)和Emory(0.942)评分预测死亡率的能力最好。结论:与其他7种风险评分相比,新型CABIN评分具有较好的预测能力和统计学优势。尽管有sTIPS,医院死亡率仍然很高,可以通过CABIN B类或C类或CABIN评分> 10来预测。船舱A患者的生存率为100%,船舱B的死亡率为75%,船舱C的死亡率为87.5%,船舱评分> 10的死亡率为83%。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信