预测福尼尔坏疽死亡率的评分系统比较分析:单中心 15 年的经验。

IF 2.4 3区 医学 Q2 SURGERY
Updates in Surgery Pub Date : 2024-11-01 Epub Date: 2024-10-08 DOI:10.1007/s13304-024-02021-z
Yusuf Arıkan, Büsra Emir, Oğuz Tarhan, Ömer Koras, Deniz Noyan Ozlu, Ubeyd Sungur, Mehmet Zeynel Keskin, Yusuf Özlem İlbey
{"title":"预测福尼尔坏疽死亡率的评分系统比较分析:单中心 15 年的经验。","authors":"Yusuf Arıkan, Büsra Emir, Oğuz Tarhan, Ömer Koras, Deniz Noyan Ozlu, Ubeyd Sungur, Mehmet Zeynel Keskin, Yusuf Özlem İlbey","doi":"10.1007/s13304-024-02021-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>To compare 5 published scoring systems (Fournier gangrene severity index [FGSI], Uludag FGSI [UFGSI], age-adjusted Charlson Comorbidity Index [ACCI] and the Quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) and the Laboratory Risk Indicator for Necrotizing fasciitis (LRINEC) scores and to evaluate risk factors for outcome prediction in patients with Fournier gangrene (FG). Between 2010 and 2024, 311 patients were included in the study. The data of 276 survivors and 55 non-survivors were compared. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to determine which of the 5 scoring systems calculated according to demographic, laboratory and clinical data predicted mortality better. In addition, a cut-off value for these scoring systems was determined by ROC analysis. The mortality rate was 17.6% in FG patients. In all 5 scoring systems, univariate analyses showed higher values in non-survivor patients, while UFGSI and FGSI scoring systems were superior to other scoring systems in multivariate analyses (p < 0.001). ROC analysis using mortality-based sensitivity and specificity revealed that the optimal cut-off values for FGSI, UFGSI, ACCI, SOFA and LRINEC should be equal to or higher than 10, 12, 4, 2 and 8, respectively. UFGSI and FGSI scores had the highest AUC values among all scores. This was followed by ACCI, qSOFAand LRINEC. For a UFGSI score ≥ 12, the sensitivity was 84%, specificity 97%, PPV 85% and NPV 97%. Among the scoring systems used to predict mortality, UFGSI was the most accurate, while LRINEC was the least accurate.</p>","PeriodicalId":23391,"journal":{"name":"Updates in Surgery","volume":" ","pages":"2683-2692"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparative analysis of scoring systems for predicting mortality in Fournier gangrene: single center, 15 years experience.\",\"authors\":\"Yusuf Arıkan, Büsra Emir, Oğuz Tarhan, Ömer Koras, Deniz Noyan Ozlu, Ubeyd Sungur, Mehmet Zeynel Keskin, Yusuf Özlem İlbey\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s13304-024-02021-z\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>To compare 5 published scoring systems (Fournier gangrene severity index [FGSI], Uludag FGSI [UFGSI], age-adjusted Charlson Comorbidity Index [ACCI] and the Quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) and the Laboratory Risk Indicator for Necrotizing fasciitis (LRINEC) scores and to evaluate risk factors for outcome prediction in patients with Fournier gangrene (FG). Between 2010 and 2024, 311 patients were included in the study. The data of 276 survivors and 55 non-survivors were compared. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to determine which of the 5 scoring systems calculated according to demographic, laboratory and clinical data predicted mortality better. In addition, a cut-off value for these scoring systems was determined by ROC analysis. The mortality rate was 17.6% in FG patients. In all 5 scoring systems, univariate analyses showed higher values in non-survivor patients, while UFGSI and FGSI scoring systems were superior to other scoring systems in multivariate analyses (p < 0.001). ROC analysis using mortality-based sensitivity and specificity revealed that the optimal cut-off values for FGSI, UFGSI, ACCI, SOFA and LRINEC should be equal to or higher than 10, 12, 4, 2 and 8, respectively. UFGSI and FGSI scores had the highest AUC values among all scores. This was followed by ACCI, qSOFAand LRINEC. For a UFGSI score ≥ 12, the sensitivity was 84%, specificity 97%, PPV 85% and NPV 97%. Among the scoring systems used to predict mortality, UFGSI was the most accurate, while LRINEC was the least accurate.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":23391,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Updates in Surgery\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"2683-2692\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Updates in Surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s13304-024-02021-z\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/10/8 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"SURGERY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Updates in Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s13304-024-02021-z","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/10/8 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

比较5种已发表的评分系统(福尼尔坏疽严重程度指数[FGSI]、乌鲁达格福尼尔坏疽严重程度指数[UFGSI]、年龄调整后的夏尔森合并症指数[ACCI]、快速器官功能衰竭序列评估[qSOFA]和坏死性筋膜炎实验室风险指标[LRINEC]评分),并评估预测福尼尔坏疽患者预后的风险因素。2010 年至 2024 年间,共有 311 名患者被纳入研究。比较了 276 名存活者和 55 名非存活者的数据。研究人员进行了单变量和多变量分析,以确定根据人口统计学、实验室和临床数据计算出的 5 个评分系统中哪一个能更好地预测死亡率。此外,还通过 ROC 分析确定了这些评分系统的临界值。FG患者的死亡率为17.6%。在所有 5 个评分系统中,单变量分析显示非存活患者的评分值较高,而在多变量分析中,UFGSI 和 FGSI 评分系统优于其他评分系统(P<0.05)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparative analysis of scoring systems for predicting mortality in Fournier gangrene: single center, 15 years experience.

To compare 5 published scoring systems (Fournier gangrene severity index [FGSI], Uludag FGSI [UFGSI], age-adjusted Charlson Comorbidity Index [ACCI] and the Quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) and the Laboratory Risk Indicator for Necrotizing fasciitis (LRINEC) scores and to evaluate risk factors for outcome prediction in patients with Fournier gangrene (FG). Between 2010 and 2024, 311 patients were included in the study. The data of 276 survivors and 55 non-survivors were compared. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to determine which of the 5 scoring systems calculated according to demographic, laboratory and clinical data predicted mortality better. In addition, a cut-off value for these scoring systems was determined by ROC analysis. The mortality rate was 17.6% in FG patients. In all 5 scoring systems, univariate analyses showed higher values in non-survivor patients, while UFGSI and FGSI scoring systems were superior to other scoring systems in multivariate analyses (p < 0.001). ROC analysis using mortality-based sensitivity and specificity revealed that the optimal cut-off values for FGSI, UFGSI, ACCI, SOFA and LRINEC should be equal to or higher than 10, 12, 4, 2 and 8, respectively. UFGSI and FGSI scores had the highest AUC values among all scores. This was followed by ACCI, qSOFAand LRINEC. For a UFGSI score ≥ 12, the sensitivity was 84%, specificity 97%, PPV 85% and NPV 97%. Among the scoring systems used to predict mortality, UFGSI was the most accurate, while LRINEC was the least accurate.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Updates in Surgery
Updates in Surgery Medicine-Surgery
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
7.70%
发文量
208
期刊介绍: Updates in Surgery (UPIS) has been founded in 2010 as the official journal of the Italian Society of Surgery. It’s an international, English-language, peer-reviewed journal dedicated to the surgical sciences. Its main goal is to offer a valuable update on the most recent developments of those surgical techniques that are rapidly evolving, forcing the community of surgeons to a rigorous debate and a continuous refinement of standards of care. In this respect position papers on the mostly debated surgical approaches and accreditation criteria have been published and are welcome for the future. Beside its focus on general surgery, the journal draws particular attention to cutting edge topics and emerging surgical fields that are publishing in monothematic issues guest edited by well-known experts. Updates in Surgery has been considering various types of papers: editorials, comprehensive reviews, original studies and technical notes related to specific surgical procedures and techniques on liver, colorectal, gastric, pancreatic, robotic and bariatric surgery.
×
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