The accuracy of prognostic scoring systems for post-operative morbidity and mortality in patients with perforated peptic ulcer
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18203/2349-2902.isj20160244Keywords:
Scoring system, Perforated peptic ulcer (PPU), Morbidity, MortalityAbstract
Background: To determine the accuracy of Boey score, American society of anesthesiologists (ASA) score, peptic ulcer perforation (PULP) score and the mannheim peritonitis index (MPI) score and compare each predicted scoring systems for prediction the morbidity and mortality of patients with perforated peptic ulcer.
Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the patients with gastric or duodenal ulcer perforation in Bhumibol Adulyadej Hospital, Bangkok, Thailand between 1 January 2008 and 31 December 2012. The morbidity and mortality within 30 days of the PPU patient who underwent the surgical procedure was determined. The predicted scoring systems included Boey score, ASA score, PULP score and MPI score were calculated. We used area under curve of receiver operating characteristics curve to compare the scoring accuracy.
Results: The study included 140 patients, Female 17.9% and male 82.1%. The mean age was 48.5 years. The most common site of PPU was the pre-pyloric region (80%). The most common operative procedure was the simple suture with omental graft. The complication rate was 20.71%. Overall mortality rate was 3.57%. The AUC for morbidity prediction was 0.671 for Boey score, 0.684 for ASA score, 0.698 for MPI score and 0.727 for PULP score. The AUC for mortality prediction was 0.728 for Boey score, 0.776 for ASA score, 0.771 for MPI score and 0.784 for PULP score.
Conclusions: The PULP score may be the better prognostic scoring system for post-operative morbidity and mortality of PPU patient than Boey score, ASA and MPI.
References
Lohsiriwat V, Prapasrivorakul S, Lohsiriwat D. Perforated peptic ulcer: clinical presentation, surgical outcomes, and the accuracy of the Boey scoring system in predicting postoperative morbidity and mortality. World J Surg. 2009;33:80-5.
Moller MH, Engebjerg MC, Adamsen S, Bendix J, Thomsen RW. The peptic ulcer perforations (PULP) score: a predictor of mortality following peptic ulcer perforation:A cohort study. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2012;56:655-62.
Boey J, Choi SK, Poon A, Alagaratnam TT. Risk stratification in perforated duodenal ulcers. A prospective validation of predictive factors. Ann Surg. 1987;205:22-6.
Wacha H, Linder MM, Feldmann U, Wesch G, Gundlach E, Steifensand RA. Mannheims peritonitis index-prediction of risk of death from peritonitis. Theor Surg. 1987;1:169-77.
Saklad M. Grading of patients for surgical procedures. Anesthesiology. 1941;2:281-4.
Kim JM, Jeong SH, Lee YJ, Park ST, Choi SK, Hong SC. Analysis of risk factors for postoperative morbidity in perforated peptic ulcer. J Gastric Cancer. 2012;12(1):26-35.
Lee FY, Leung KL, Lai BS, Ng SS, Dexter S, Lau WY. Predicting mortality and morbidity of patients operated on for perforated peptic ulcers. Arch Surg. 2001;136:90-3.
Bosscha K, Reijnders K, Hulstaert PF, Algra A, Van Der Werken C. Prognostic scoring systems to predict outcome in peritonitis and intra-abdominal sepsis. Br J Surg. 1997;84:1532-4.
Moller MH, Adamsen S, Thomsen RW, Moller AM. Preoperative prognostic factors for mortality in peptic ulcer perforation- a systematic review. Scand J Gastroenterol. 2010;45:785-805.
Makela JT, Kiviniemi H, Ohtonen P, Laitinen SO. Factors that predict morbidity and mortality in patients with perforated peptic ulcers. Eur J Surg. 2002;168(8-9):446-51.
Kasetsuwan P, Thanasitthichai S, Krailadsiri W. An Impact of Helicobacter pylori eradication after simple closure of perforated peptic ulcer: a prospective randomized trial. Thai J Surg. 2003;24:85-90.
Hanley JA, McNeil BJ. The meaning and use of the area under a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. Radiology. 1982;143:29-36.
