Comparison of the American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status classification with the Charlson score as predictors of survival after radical prostatectomy

被引:61
作者
Froehner, M
Koch, R
Litz, R
Heller, A
Oehlschlaeger, S
Wirth, MP
机构
[1] Tech Univ Dresden, Univ Hosp Carl Gustav Carus, Dept Urol, D-01307 Dresden, Germany
[2] Tech Univ Dresden, Univ Hosp Carl Gustav Carus, Dept Med Stat & Biometry, D-01307 Dresden, Germany
[3] Tech Univ Dresden, Univ Hosp Carl Gustav Carus, Dept Anesthesiol, D-01307 Dresden, Germany
关键词
D O I
10.1016/S0090-4295(03)00570-3
中图分类号
R5 [内科学]; R69 [泌尿科学(泌尿生殖系疾病)];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Objectives. To compare the American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status (ASA) classification with the Charlson score in the radical prostatectomy setting. The ASA classification is a widely accepted way to evaluate perioperative risk. At present, the Charlson score is probably the most frequently used comorbidity measure to predict long-term survival after radical prostatectomy. Methods. A total of 444 consecutive patients were enrolled in this study. The ASA classification was obtained from the anesthesia chart, and the Charlson score was assigned based on conditions noted during the preoperative cardiopulmonary risk assessment or mentioned on the discharge document. Kaplan-Meier time-event curves and Mantel-Haenszel hazard ratios were estimated for comorbid (noncancer) and overall survival. Results. After a mean follow-up of 5.9 years, both classifications were able to predict comorbid and overall survival in dose-response patterns. The ASA classification was superior in terms of a clearer discrimination of the survival curves (lower P values, higher hazard ratios). Both classifications identified a high-risk group (ASA 3 and Charlson score 2 or more), but only the ASA classification sufficiently defined a low-risk group (ASA I). Conclusions. In experienced hands, the ASA classification is a promising tool to improve the classification of prognostic comorbidity in the radical prostatectomy setting and may be used as an alternative to the Charlson score. (C) 2003 Elsevier Inc.
引用
收藏
页码:698 / 701
页数:4
相关论文
共 15 条
[1]   The impact of co-morbidity on life expectancy among men with localized prostate cancer [J].
Albertsen, PC ;
Fryback, DG ;
Storer, BE ;
Kolon, TF ;
Fine, J .
JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 1996, 156 (01) :127-132
[2]  
Barry MJ, 2001, CANCER-AM CANCER SOC, V91, P2302, DOI 10.1002/1097-0142(20010615)91:12<2302::AID-CNCR1262>3.3.CO
[3]  
2-G
[4]   Contemporary results of anatomic radical prostatectomy [J].
Catalona, WJ ;
Ramos, CG ;
Carvalhal, GF .
CA-A CANCER JOURNAL FOR CLINICIANS, 1999, 49 (05) :282-296
[5]   A NEW METHOD OF CLASSIFYING PROGNOSTIC CO-MORBIDITY IN LONGITUDINAL-STUDIES - DEVELOPMENT AND VALIDATION [J].
CHARLSON, ME ;
POMPEI, P ;
ALES, KL ;
MACKENZIE, CR .
JOURNAL OF CHRONIC DISEASES, 1987, 40 (05) :373-383
[6]   Measurement and impact of comorbidity in older cancer patients [J].
Extermann, M .
CRITICAL REVIEWS IN ONCOLOGY HEMATOLOGY, 2000, 35 (03) :181-200
[7]   Preoperative cardiopulmonary risk assessment as predictor of early noncancer and overall mortality after radical prostatectomy [J].
Froehner, M ;
Koch, R ;
Litz, R ;
Oehlschlaeger, S ;
Noack, B ;
Manseck, A ;
Albrecht, DM ;
Wirth, MP .
UROLOGY, 2003, 61 (03) :596-600
[8]   A randomized trial comparing radical prostatectomy with watchful waiting in early prostate cancer [J].
Holmberg, L ;
Bill-Axelson, A ;
Helgesen, F ;
Salo, JO ;
Folmerz, P ;
Häggman, M ;
Andersson, S ;
Spångberg, A ;
Busch, C ;
Nordling, S ;
Palmgren, J ;
Adami, HO ;
Johansson, J ;
Norlén, BJ .
NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, 2002, 347 (11) :781-789
[9]  
Klabunde CN, 2002, MED CARE, V40, P26
[10]   The independent prognostic value of comorbidity among men aged &lt; 75 years with localized prostate cancer:: a population-based study [J].
Post, PN ;
Hansen, BE ;
Kil, PJM ;
Janssen-Heijnen, MLG ;
Coebergh, JWW .
BJU INTERNATIONAL, 2001, 87 (09) :821-826