Assessment of PULP score in predicting 30-day perforated duodenal ulcer morbidity, and comparison of its performance with Boey and ASA, a retrospective study

Abstract

Background: /aim: Scores commonly employed to risk stratify perforated peptic ulcer patients include ASA (American Society of Anesthesiologists), Boey and peptic ulcer perforation score (PULP). However, few studies assessed and compared the accuracy indices of these three scores in predicting post PPU repair 30-day morbidity. We assessed accuracy indices of PULP, and compared them to Boey and ASA in predicting post perforated duodenal (PDU) ulcer repair 30-day morbidity. Methods: Retrospective chart review of all PDU patients (perforated duodenal ulcers only) at the largest two hospitals in Qatar (N = 152). Data included demographic, clinical, laboratory, operative, and post repair 30-day morbidity. Area under the Curve (AUC), sensitivity and specificity were computed for each of the 3 scores. Multivariate logistic regression assessed the accuracy indices of each score. Results: All patients were males (M age 37.41 years). Post PDU repair 30-day morbidity was 10.5% (16 morbidities). Older age, higher ASA (?3), Boey (?1) or PULP (?8) scores, shock on admission and preoperative comorbidities; and conversely, lower hemoglobin and albumin were all positively significantly associated with higher post PDU 30-day morbidity. PULP displayed the largest AUC (72%), and was the only score to significantly predict 30-day morbidity. The current study is the first to report the sensitivity and specificity of these three scores for post PDU repair 30-day morbidity; and first to assess accuracy indices for PULP in predicting post PDU repair 30-day morbidity. Conclusion: PULP score had the largest AUC and was the only score to significantly predict post PDU repair 30-day morbidity.