Urszula Skorus-Zadęcka, Apolonia Miążek, Natalia Zmysłowska, Kuba Kupniewski, Jakub Kenig
{"title":"合并症评估方法及其在预测因癌症接受择期腹部手术的老年患者的治疗效果方面的意义--范围界定综述","authors":"Urszula Skorus-Zadęcka, Apolonia Miążek, Natalia Zmysłowska, Kuba Kupniewski, Jakub Kenig","doi":"10.1016/j.canep.2024.102597","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><p>The scoping review was performed to identify methods of comorbidity assessment and to evaluate their significance in predicting the results of treatment of older patients undergoing elective abdominal surgeries for cancer.</p></div><div><h3>Materials and methods</h3><p>Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL, Web of Science, ClinicalTrials.gov and European Trials Register were searched for eligible studies investigating the impact of comorbidity on various postoperative outcomes of patients aged ≥65. Findings were narratively reported.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>The review identified 40 studies with a total population of 59,612 patients, using eight different methods of comorbidity assessment. The most used was Charlson Comorbidity Index (60 % of studies) and presence of specific comorbid conditions (38 %). No study provided rationale for the choice of specific comorbidity measure. Most of the included studies reported short-term results (75 %), such as postoperative complications (43 %) and mortality (18 %) as main clinical endpoint. The results were inconsistent across the studies.</p></div><div><h3>Discussion</h3><p>There is still no consensus regarding the choice of comorbidity measures and their role in postoperative outcome prediction. Further efforts are needed to develop new, well-designed, more effective comorbidity assessments tools.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":56322,"journal":{"name":"Cancer Epidemiology","volume":"91 ","pages":"Article 102597"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comorbidity assessment methods and their significance in predicting the results of treatment of older patients undergoing elective abdominal surgeries for cancer – A scoping review\",\"authors\":\"Urszula Skorus-Zadęcka, Apolonia Miążek, Natalia Zmysłowska, Kuba Kupniewski, Jakub Kenig\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.canep.2024.102597\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><p>The scoping review was performed to identify methods of comorbidity assessment and to evaluate their significance in predicting the results of treatment of older patients undergoing elective abdominal surgeries for cancer.</p></div><div><h3>Materials and methods</h3><p>Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL, Web of Science, ClinicalTrials.gov and European Trials Register were searched for eligible studies investigating the impact of comorbidity on various postoperative outcomes of patients aged ≥65. Findings were narratively reported.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>The review identified 40 studies with a total population of 59,612 patients, using eight different methods of comorbidity assessment. The most used was Charlson Comorbidity Index (60 % of studies) and presence of specific comorbid conditions (38 %). No study provided rationale for the choice of specific comorbidity measure. Most of the included studies reported short-term results (75 %), such as postoperative complications (43 %) and mortality (18 %) as main clinical endpoint. The results were inconsistent across the studies.</p></div><div><h3>Discussion</h3><p>There is still no consensus regarding the choice of comorbidity measures and their role in postoperative outcome prediction. Further efforts are needed to develop new, well-designed, more effective comorbidity assessments tools.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":56322,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Cancer Epidemiology\",\"volume\":\"91 \",\"pages\":\"Article 102597\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Cancer Epidemiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1877782124000766\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ONCOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cancer Epidemiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1877782124000766","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
材料与方法检索了Ovid MEDLINE、Embase、CENTRAL、Web of Science、ClinicalTrials.gov和欧洲试验注册中心的符合条件的研究,这些研究调查了合并症对年龄≥65岁患者各种术后结果的影响。结果该研究共发现了 40 项研究,涉及 59612 名患者,使用了 8 种不同的合并症评估方法。使用最多的是夏尔森合并症指数(60%的研究)和是否存在特定合并症(38%)。没有研究提供选择特定合并症测量方法的理由。大部分纳入的研究都报告了短期结果(75%),如作为主要临床终点的术后并发症(43%)和死亡率(18%)。讨论关于合并症测量指标的选择及其在术后结果预测中的作用,目前仍未达成共识。需要进一步努力开发新的、精心设计的、更有效的合并症评估工具。
Comorbidity assessment methods and their significance in predicting the results of treatment of older patients undergoing elective abdominal surgeries for cancer – A scoping review
Introduction
The scoping review was performed to identify methods of comorbidity assessment and to evaluate their significance in predicting the results of treatment of older patients undergoing elective abdominal surgeries for cancer.
Materials and methods
Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL, Web of Science, ClinicalTrials.gov and European Trials Register were searched for eligible studies investigating the impact of comorbidity on various postoperative outcomes of patients aged ≥65. Findings were narratively reported.
Results
The review identified 40 studies with a total population of 59,612 patients, using eight different methods of comorbidity assessment. The most used was Charlson Comorbidity Index (60 % of studies) and presence of specific comorbid conditions (38 %). No study provided rationale for the choice of specific comorbidity measure. Most of the included studies reported short-term results (75 %), such as postoperative complications (43 %) and mortality (18 %) as main clinical endpoint. The results were inconsistent across the studies.
Discussion
There is still no consensus regarding the choice of comorbidity measures and their role in postoperative outcome prediction. Further efforts are needed to develop new, well-designed, more effective comorbidity assessments tools.
期刊介绍:
Cancer Epidemiology is dedicated to increasing understanding about cancer causes, prevention and control. The scope of the journal embraces all aspects of cancer epidemiology including:
• Descriptive epidemiology
• Studies of risk factors for disease initiation, development and prognosis
• Screening and early detection
• Prevention and control
• Methodological issues
The journal publishes original research articles (full length and short reports), systematic reviews and meta-analyses, editorials, commentaries and letters to the editor commenting on previously published research.