Loading…

Efficacy of the Gallbladder Cancer Predictive Risk Score Based on Pathological Findings: A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis

Background The optimal prognostic predictive system for gallbladder carcinoma (GBC) has not been established. The gallbladder cancer predictive risk score (GBRS) based on pathological findings identifies incidental GBC patients at risk of recurrence. Objective We aimed to validate the prognostic abi...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Annals of surgical oncology 2018-06, Vol.25 (6), p.1699-1708
Main Authors: Mochizuki, Tetsuya, Abe, Tomoyuki, Amano, Hironobu, Hanada, Keiji, Hattori, Minoru, Kobayashi, Tsuyoshi, Nakahara, Masahiro, Ohdan, Hideki, Noriyuki, Toshio
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Background The optimal prognostic predictive system for gallbladder carcinoma (GBC) has not been established. The gallbladder cancer predictive risk score (GBRS) based on pathological findings identifies incidental GBC patients at risk of recurrence. Objective We aimed to validate the prognostic ability of the GBRS in all GBC patients following curative surgery. Methods Fifty-six patients with GBC who underwent curative surgery between 1996 and 2016 were included in this study. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to determine prognostic factors associated with overall and recurrence-free survival, and propensity score-matched analysis was performed. Results The median patient age was 71.9 years, and 39.3% of patients were males. All patients underwent curative surgery (33.9%, simple cholecystectomy; 66.1%, more advanced procedures, such as hepatectomy; and 32.1%, bile duct reconstruction). On univariate analysis, preoperative carbohydrate antigen 19-9 (CA19–9) ≥ 37 U/mL ( p  = 0.042), postoperative complications ( p  = 0.043), and a high GBRS ( p  
ISSN:1068-9265
1534-4681
DOI:10.1245/s10434-018-6444-3