Cargando…
Construction and Verification of Risk Predicting Models to Evaluate the Possibility of Venous Thromboembolism After Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy
BACKGROUND: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is the second leading cause for death of radical prostatectomy. We aimed to establish new nomogram to predict the VTE risk after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP). METHODS: Patients receiving RARP in our center from November 2015 to June 2021, were...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer International Publishing
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9246795/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35316433 http://dx.doi.org/10.1245/s10434-022-11574-5 |
_version_ | 1784739032956141568 |
---|---|
author | Cheng, Xu Zhou, Lizhi Liu, Wentao Li, Yijian Peng, Mou Wang, Yinhuai |
author_facet | Cheng, Xu Zhou, Lizhi Liu, Wentao Li, Yijian Peng, Mou Wang, Yinhuai |
author_sort | Cheng, Xu |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is the second leading cause for death of radical prostatectomy. We aimed to establish new nomogram to predict the VTE risk after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP). METHODS: Patients receiving RARP in our center from November 2015 to June 2021, were enrolled in study. They were randomly divided into training and testing cohorts by 8:2. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression (model A) and stepwise logistic regression (model B) were used to fit two models. The net reclassification improvement (NRI), integrated discrimination improvement (IDI), and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve were used to compare predictive abilities of two new models with widely used Caprini risk assessment (CRA) model. Then, two nomograms were constructed and received internal validation. RESULTS: Totally, 351 patients were included. The area under ROC of model A and model B were 0.967 (95% confidence interval: 0.945–0.990) and 0.978 (95% confidence interval: 0.960–0.996), which also were assayed in the testing cohorts. Both the prediction and classification abilities of the two new models were superior to CRA model (NRI > 0, IDI > 0, p < 0.05). The C-index of Model A and Model B were 0.968 and 0.978, respectively. For clinical usefulness, the two new models offered a net benefit with threshold probability between 0.08 and 1 in decision curve analysis, suggesting the two new models predict VTE events more accurately. CONCLUSIONS: Both two new models have good prediction accuracy and are superior to CRA model. Model A has an advantage of less variable. This easy-to-use model enables rapid clinical decision-making and early intervention in high-risk groups, which ultimately benefit patients. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1245/s10434-022-11574-5. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9246795 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Springer International Publishing |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-92467952022-07-02 Construction and Verification of Risk Predicting Models to Evaluate the Possibility of Venous Thromboembolism After Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy Cheng, Xu Zhou, Lizhi Liu, Wentao Li, Yijian Peng, Mou Wang, Yinhuai Ann Surg Oncol Urologic Oncology BACKGROUND: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is the second leading cause for death of radical prostatectomy. We aimed to establish new nomogram to predict the VTE risk after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP). METHODS: Patients receiving RARP in our center from November 2015 to June 2021, were enrolled in study. They were randomly divided into training and testing cohorts by 8:2. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression (model A) and stepwise logistic regression (model B) were used to fit two models. The net reclassification improvement (NRI), integrated discrimination improvement (IDI), and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve were used to compare predictive abilities of two new models with widely used Caprini risk assessment (CRA) model. Then, two nomograms were constructed and received internal validation. RESULTS: Totally, 351 patients were included. The area under ROC of model A and model B were 0.967 (95% confidence interval: 0.945–0.990) and 0.978 (95% confidence interval: 0.960–0.996), which also were assayed in the testing cohorts. Both the prediction and classification abilities of the two new models were superior to CRA model (NRI > 0, IDI > 0, p < 0.05). The C-index of Model A and Model B were 0.968 and 0.978, respectively. For clinical usefulness, the two new models offered a net benefit with threshold probability between 0.08 and 1 in decision curve analysis, suggesting the two new models predict VTE events more accurately. CONCLUSIONS: Both two new models have good prediction accuracy and are superior to CRA model. Model A has an advantage of less variable. This easy-to-use model enables rapid clinical decision-making and early intervention in high-risk groups, which ultimately benefit patients. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1245/s10434-022-11574-5. Springer International Publishing 2022-03-22 2022 /pmc/articles/PMC9246795/ /pubmed/35316433 http://dx.doi.org/10.1245/s10434-022-11574-5 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Urologic Oncology Cheng, Xu Zhou, Lizhi Liu, Wentao Li, Yijian Peng, Mou Wang, Yinhuai Construction and Verification of Risk Predicting Models to Evaluate the Possibility of Venous Thromboembolism After Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy |
title | Construction and Verification of Risk Predicting Models to Evaluate the Possibility of Venous Thromboembolism After Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy |
title_full | Construction and Verification of Risk Predicting Models to Evaluate the Possibility of Venous Thromboembolism After Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy |
title_fullStr | Construction and Verification of Risk Predicting Models to Evaluate the Possibility of Venous Thromboembolism After Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy |
title_full_unstemmed | Construction and Verification of Risk Predicting Models to Evaluate the Possibility of Venous Thromboembolism After Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy |
title_short | Construction and Verification of Risk Predicting Models to Evaluate the Possibility of Venous Thromboembolism After Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy |
title_sort | construction and verification of risk predicting models to evaluate the possibility of venous thromboembolism after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy |
topic | Urologic Oncology |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9246795/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35316433 http://dx.doi.org/10.1245/s10434-022-11574-5 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT chengxu constructionandverificationofriskpredictingmodelstoevaluatethepossibilityofvenousthromboembolismafterrobotassistedradicalprostatectomy AT zhoulizhi constructionandverificationofriskpredictingmodelstoevaluatethepossibilityofvenousthromboembolismafterrobotassistedradicalprostatectomy AT liuwentao constructionandverificationofriskpredictingmodelstoevaluatethepossibilityofvenousthromboembolismafterrobotassistedradicalprostatectomy AT liyijian constructionandverificationofriskpredictingmodelstoevaluatethepossibilityofvenousthromboembolismafterrobotassistedradicalprostatectomy AT pengmou constructionandverificationofriskpredictingmodelstoevaluatethepossibilityofvenousthromboembolismafterrobotassistedradicalprostatectomy AT wangyinhuai constructionandverificationofriskpredictingmodelstoevaluatethepossibilityofvenousthromboembolismafterrobotassistedradicalprostatectomy |