Comparison of Risk Scoring Systems to Predict the Outcome in ASA-PS V Patients Undergoing Surgery: A Retrospective Cohort Study
- PMID: 27043696
- PMCID: PMC4998557
- DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000003238
Comparison of Risk Scoring Systems to Predict the Outcome in ASA-PS V Patients Undergoing Surgery: A Retrospective Cohort Study
Abstract
Operative decision in American Society of Anesthesiology Physical Status (ASA-PS) V patient is difficult as this group of patients expected to have high mortality rate. Another risk scoring system in this ASA-PS V subset of patients can aid to ease this decision. Data of ASA-PS V classified patients between 2011 and 2013 years in a single hospital were analyzed in this study. Predicted mortality of these patients was determined with acute physiology and chronic health evaluations (APACHE) II, simplified acute physiology score (SAPS II), Charlson comorbidity index (CCI), Porthsmouth physiological and operative severity score for enumeration of mortality and morbidity (P-POSSUM), Surgical apgar score (SAS), and Goldman cardiac risk index (GCRI) scores. Observed and predicted mortality rates according to the risk indexes in these patients were compared at survivor and nonsurvivor group of patients. Risk stratification was made with receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curve analysis. Data of 89 patients were included in the analyses. Predicted mortality rates generated by APACHE II and SAPS II scoring systems were significantly different between survivor and nonsurvivor group of patients. Risk stratification with ROC analysis revealed that area under curve was 0.784 and 0.681 for SAPS II and APACHE II scoring systems, respectively. Highest sensitivity (77.3) is reached with SAPS II score. APACHE II and SAPS II are better predictive tools of mortality in ASA-PS V classified subset of patients. Discrimination power of SAPS II score is the best among the compared risk stratification scores. SAPS II can be suggested as an additional risk scoring system for ASA-PS V patients.
Conflict of interest statement
The authors report no conflicts of interest.
Figures
References
-
- Cuvillon P, Nouvellon E, Marret E, et al. American Society of Anesthesiologists’ Physical Statussystem: a multicentre Francophone study to analyse reasons for classification disagreement. Eur J Anaesthesiol 2011; 28:742–747. - PubMed
-
- Lupei MI, Chipman JG, Beilman GJ, et al. The association between ASA status and other risk stratification models on postoperative intensive care unit outcomes. Anesth Analg 2014; 118:989–994. - PubMed
-
- Sidi A, Lobato EB, Cohen JA. The american society of anesthesiologists’ physical status: category. V revisited J Clin Anesth 2000; 12:328–334. - PubMed
-
- Vacanti CJ, VanHouten RJ, Hill RC. A statistical analysis of the relationship of physical status to postoperative mortality in 68,388 cases. Anesth Analg 1970; 49:564–566. - PubMed
-
- Marx GF, Mateo CV, Orkin LR. Computer analysis of postanesthetic death. Anesthesiology 1973; 39:54–58. - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical
