Alternative Fistula Risk Score for Pancreatoduodenectomy (a-FRS): Design an

Evidencio uses JavaScript for many of its features. Please enable JavaScript to enable calculations

Alternative Fistula Risk Score for Pancreatoduodenectomy (a-FRS): Design and International External Validation

Postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) remain one of the most threatening complications after pancreatoduodenectomy (PD). The Fistula Risk Score (FRS, Callery - 2013) predicts POPF based on gland texture, pancreatic duct diameter, intraoperative blood loss, and pathology. Some have argued that a FRS without blood loss could be preferred. First, intraoperative blood loss was not a significant factor at recent external validation (Shubert - 2015, Grendal - 2017) Second, it is currently not registered in several audits, for example, the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (US-NSQIP) and the Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Audit (DPCA). Third, blood loss depends on surgical quality, and is therefore not a suitable prognostic factor for adjusting POPF-risk for benchmarking. Fourth, several studies have argued that estimation of blood loss is unreliable and inaccurate, and this metric therefore should not be used to judge physician performance or patient outcomes. Finally, in future patients this factor may be even less predictive for POPF, because for example minimally-invasive PD leads to less blood loss but similar rates of pancreatic fistula. Aim of this study was to develop a fistula risk score without blood loss.

Research authors: Mungroop TH, van Rijssen LB, van Klaveren D, Smits FJ, van Woerden V, Linnemann RJ, de Pastena M, Klompmaker S, Marchegiani G, Ecker B, van Dieren S, Bonsing B, Busch OR, van Dam RM, Erdmann J, van Eijck CH, Gerhards MF, van Goor H, van der Harst E, de Hingh IG, de Jong KP, Kazemier G, Luyer M, Shamali A, Barbaro S, Armstrong T, Takhar A, Hamady Z, Klaase J, Lips DJ, Molenaar IQ, Nieuwenhuijs VB, Rupert C, van Santvoort HC, Scheepers JJ, van der Schelling GP, Bassi M, Vollmer CM, Steyerberg EW, Abu Hilal M, Groot Koerkamp B, Besselink MG

Public
Surgery
{{ modelType }}

Details
Validate model
Save input
Load input

Details
Validate model
Save input
Load input

Calculated risk of postoperative pancreatic fistula:

Result interval {{ additionalResult.min }} to {{ additionalResult.max }}

Conditional information

How this model should be used:
This validated fistula risk model allows for prediction of POPF during surgery based on pancreatic texture, pancreatic duct diameter, and BMI.

Model performance:
Discrimination of the model was good with an AUC of 0.75 (95% CI: 0.71-0.78) after internal validation, 0.78 [0.74-0.82] after external validation. The predictive capacity of a-FRS was comparable with the original-FRS, both for the 2005 definition (AUC 0.78 vs. 0.75, P = 0.03), and 2016 definition (AUC 0.72 vs. 0.70, P = 0.05).

Source:
Mungroop et al, Annals of Surgery, 2017.

Note

Notes are only visible in the result download and will not be saved by Evidencio

This model is provided for educational, training and information purposes. It must not be used to support medical decision making, or to provide medical or diagnostic services. Read our full disclaimer.

Underlying models Part of

Comments

Comment

Please enter a comment

Comments are visible to anyone

Model feedback

No feedback yet 1 Comment {{ model.comments.length }} Comments

On {{ comment.created_at }} {{ comment.user.username }} a no longer registered author wrote:

Additional information

Details

Model author

T.H. Mungroop MD MSc

Model ID

621

Version

1.90

Revision date

2018-06-04

Specialty

Surgery

Model type

Logistic regression ^{(Calculation)}

MeSH terms

Pancreaticoduodenectomy

Complication, Postoperative

Pancreatic Fistula

Risk Assessment

Clinical Prediction Rule

Rating

Status

Public

Formula
No Formula defined yet

Condition	Formula

Study characteristics

Additional information

Methods:
The a-FRS was developed in two cohorts: the Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Audit (18 centers) and the University Hospital Southampton NHS. Primary outcome was grade B/C POPF according the 2005 ISGPS definition. A prediction model was proposed and externally validated in two independent databases (University Hospital of Verona and University Hospital of Pennsylvania). The a-FRS was also compared to the original-FRS.

Study Population

Total population size: 2830

Additional characteristics

No additional characteristics defined

Supporting Publications

Title or description

Related files

Preview

Name

Please sign in to enable Evidencio print features

In order to use the Evidencio print features, you need to be logged in.
If you don't have an Evidencio Community Account you can create your free personal account at:

https://www.evidencio.com/registration

Printed results - Examples {{ new Date().toLocaleString() }}

Evidencio Community Account Benefits

With an Evidencio Community account you can:

Create and publish your own prediction models.
Share your prediction models with your colleagues, research group, organization or the world.
Review and provide feedback on models that have been shared with you.
Validate your models and validate models from other users.
Find models based on Title, Keyword, Author, Institute, or MeSH classification.
Use and save prediction models and their data.
Use patient specific protocols and guidelines based on sequential models and decision trees.
Stay up-to-date with new models in your field as they are published.
Create your own lists of favorite models and topics.

A personal Evidencio account is free, with no strings attached!
Join us and help create clarity, transparency, and efficiency in the creation, validation, and use of medical prediction models.

Disclaimer: Calculations alone should never dictate patient care, and are no substitute for professional judgement.