Published in

Karger Publishers, Digestive Surgery, 4-5(31), p. 269-275, 2014

DOI: 10.1159/000365293

Links

Tools

Export citation

Search in Google Scholar

Validation of the Estimation of Physiologic Ability and Surgical Stress (E-PASS) Score for Maintenance Hemodialysis Patients Undergoing Elective Abdominal Surgery

Journal article published in 2014 by Hayato Abe ORCID, Ken-Ichi Mafune, Keisuke Minamimura, Tooru Hirata
This paper is made freely available by the publisher.
This paper is made freely available by the publisher.

Full text: Download

Green circle
Preprint: archiving allowed
Green circle
Postprint: archiving allowed
Red circle
Published version: archiving forbidden
Data provided by SHERPA/RoMEO

Abstract

<b><i>Aims:</i></b> This study assessed the validity of the Estimation of Physiologic Ability and Surgical Stress (E-PASS) score in maintenance hemodialysis patients undergoing elective abdominal surgery. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of 73 hemodialysis patients who underwent elective gastrointestinal surgery. The main outcomes analyzed were the E-PASS score and postoperative course, which were defined by mortality and morbidity. The discriminative capability of the E-PASS score was evaluated using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis. <b><i>Results:</i></b> The overall mortality rate observed was 2.7% (2 patients) and the morbidity rate was 36.9%. There were no significant differences in the comprehensive risk score, preoperative score or surgical stress score for patients with or without complications (p = 0.556, 0.639 and 0.168, respectively). Subsequent ROC curve analysis demonstrated poor predictive accuracy for morbidity. When the results in our study population were compared with those in Haga's study population, our population exhibited a highly significant rightward shift (p < 0.001). <b><i>Conclusion:</i></b> The E-PASS score was a poor predictor of complications because maintenance hemodialysis patients already have relatively high risk factors. This scoring system should not be applied in such a special group with high risk factors. i 2014 S. Karger AG, Basel