Background: The study aimed to identify data-driven body mass index (BMI) thresholds that are associated with varying risk of 30 day complications following adult tonsillectomy. Methods: The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) database was utilized to conduct a retrospective cohort analysis of patients undergoing adult tonsillectomy from 2005 to 2019. Stratum-specific likelihood ratio (SSLR) analysis was conducted to determine data-driven BMI strata that maximized the likelihood of 30 day complications following adult tonsillectomy. Patient demographics and clinical comorbidities were compared using chi-squared analysis and student t tests, where appropriate, for each stratum. Multivariable regression analysis was conducted to confirm association between identified data-driven strata with 30 day complication rates. Results: In total, 44,161 patients undergoing adult tonsillectomy were included in this study. SSLR analysis identified 2 BMI categories: 18 to 45 and 46+. Relative to the 18 to 45 BMI cohort, the 46+ BMI cohort was more likely to have 30 day all-cause complications after surgery [odds ratio (OR): 1.62, P = .007]. Specifically, the 46+ BMI cohort had significantly higher odds for 30 day major medical complications (OR: 2.86, P = .001), pulmonary domain complications (OR: 1.86, P = .041), unplanned reintubation (OR: 2.65, P = .033), and deep vein thrombosis (OR: 6.54, P = .026). Conclusions: We identified a BMI threshold of 46+ that was associated with a significantly increased risk of 30 day all-cause complications following adult tonsillectomy. These BMI strata can guide preoperative planning and risk-stratifying models for predicting 30 day complications in tonsillectomy surgery.

UNASSIGNED: There is paucity of studies on preoperative risk assessment tools in patients undergoing emergency surgery. The present study evaluated the performance of the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) II, American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) surgical risk calculator and American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status (PS) classification system in patients undergoing emergency exploratory laparotomy.
UNASSIGNED: This retrospective study included 60 adult patients who underwent emergency exploratory laparotomy for perforation peritonitis. The clinical details, ASA PS classification, laboratory investigations and postoperative course of patients were retrieved from their medical records. Based on these details, APACHE II and ACS-NSQIP were calculated for the patients. The study\'s primary outcome was the accuracy of the preoperative APACHE II, ACS-NSQIP risk calculator and ASA PS class in predicting the postoperative 30-day mortality of patients.
UNASSIGNED: The area under the curve (AUC) of APACHE II, ACS-NSQIP score, and ASA PS classification for mortality 30 days after surgery was 0.737, 0.694 and 0.601, respectively. The P value for the Hosmer-Lemeshow (H-L) test of scoring systems was 0.05, 0.25 and 0.05, respectively. AUC for postoperative complications was 0.799 for APACHE II, 0.683 for ACS-NSQIP and 0.601 for ASA PS classification. H-L test of these scoring systems for complications after surgery revealed P values of 0.62, 0.36 and 0.53, respectively.
UNASSIGNED: Compared to the ACS-NSQIP and ASA PS classification system, the APACHE II score has a better discriminative ability for postoperative complications and mortality in adult patients undergoing emergency exploratory laparotomy.

Introduction Lumbar spine interbody fusions have been performed to relieve back pain and improve stability due to various underlying pathologies. Anterior interbody fusion and posterior interbody fusion approaches are two main approaches that are classically compared. In an attempt to compare these two approaches to the spine, large retrospective national database reviews have been performed to compare and predict 30-day postoperative outcomes; however, they have conflicting findings. Obesity, defined as having a body mass index (BMI) over 30 kg/m2, may also contribute to the extent of spine pathology and is associated with increased rates of postoperative complications. Complication rates in patients who are obese have yet to be thoroughly investigated using a large national database. Our present investigation aims to make this comparison using the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) database. The goal of the present study is to utilize a nationwide prospective database to determine short-term differences in postoperative outcomes between posterior and anterior lumbar fusion in patients with obesity and relate these findings to previous studies in the general population. Methods A retrospective cohort analysis was conducted on 9,021 patient data from the ACS-NSQIP database from 2015 to 2019 who underwent an elective, single-level fusion via anterior or posterior surgical approach. This database captures over 150 clinical variables on individual patient cases, including demographic data, preoperative risk factors and laboratory values, intraoperative data, and significant events up to postoperative day 30. All outcome measures were included in this analysis with special attention to rates of deep venous thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE), prolonged length of stay (LOS), reoperation, and operation time. Results Multivariable analysis controlling for age, BMI, sex, race, functional status, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) class, and selected comorbidities with P < 0.05 demonstrated that the anterior approach was an independent predictor for all significant outcomes except prolonged length of stay. Compared to the posterior approach, the anterior approach had a shorter total operation time (B = -13.257, 95% confidence interval (CI) [-17.522, -8.992], P < 0.001), higher odds of deep vein thrombosis (odds ratio (OR) = 2.210, 95% CI [1.211, 4.033], P= 0.010), and higher odds of pulmonary embolism (OR = 2.679, 95% CI [1.311, 5.477], P = 0.007) and was protective against unplanned reoperation (OR = 0.702, 95% CI [0.548, 0.898], P = 0.005). Conclusions The obese population makes up a large and growing demographic of those undergoing spine surgery, and as such, it is pertinent to investigate the differences, advantages, and disadvantages of lumbar fusion approaches in this group. While anterior approaches may be protective of longer operation time and unplanned reoperation, this benefit may not be clinically significant when considering an increased risk of DVT and PE. Given the short-term nature of this dataset and the limitations inherent in large de-identified retrospective database studies, these findings are interpreted with caution. Longer-term follow-up studies accounting for confounding variables with spine-centered outcomes will be necessary to further elucidate these nuances.

OBJECTIVE: Many methods for preoperative risk stratifications used in everyday practice do not take into account all of the comorbidities and complex physiological status of older patients. Therefore, anaesthesiologists and surgeons must consider multiple ways of preoperative diagnostics. Determining which of the preoperative clinical risk scores [Revised Lee score, the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS NSQIP) calculator and Surgical Outcome Risk Tool (SORT)] best improves routinely used American Society of Anaesthesiologists (ASA) physical status classification.
METHODS: The prospective pilot study included 78 patients who were being prepared for extensive non-cardiac surgeries under general anaesthesia. Preoperatively, anaesthesiologist determined ASA score according to guidelines. Then, the data of patients have been processed on the interactive calculators of Revised Lee score, ACS NSQIP and SORT.
RESULTS: Mean age of included patients was 71.4 ± 6.9 years. When it comes to postoperative mortality prediction, three risk scores (ASA, ACS NSQIP and SORT) have been statistically significant, respectively, P = 0.016, P < 0.0001, P < 0.0001. Results showed that AUC being higher in ACS NSQIP and SORT (0.813; 0.797). Out of all three additional risk scores, ACS NSQIP showed to add the most to the specificity and sensitivity of ASA score, with combined AUC = 0.841.
CONCLUSIONS: ACS NSQIP and SORT increase the accuracy of ASA score. Revised Lee score cannot be considered a good indicator of postoperative mortality risk since it is primarily the score which indicates risk for cardiovascular complications. Further studies, with a greater number of patients, are needed.

Perforated peptic ulcer (PPU) is a surgical emergency needing swift operative resolution. While laparoscopic and open approaches are viable options, it remains unclear whether laparoscopic repair has significantly improved outcomes. We use a national surgical database to compare perioperative and 30-d postoperative (30POP) outcomes.
The 2016-2018 ACS-NSQIP database was used to create the patient cohort, using ICD-10 and CPT codes. An unmatched analysis identified factors that likely contributed to the laparoscopic versus open treatment allocation. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to identify outcomes that were not explained by underlying differences in the patient cohorts.
A total of 3475 patients were included: 3135 in open group (OG), 340 (~10%) in laparoscopic group (LG). After PSM to control for comorbidities and illness severity that differed between groups on univariate analysis, 288 patients remained in each group. Analysis of the matched cohorts revealed no statistically significant difference in mortality (5.9% OG versus 3.8% LG, P = 0.245). The LG had significantly longer operative times (92 versus 79 min, P = 0.003), shorter hospital stays (8.2 versus 9.4 d, P = 0.044) and higher probability of being discharged home (81% versus 73%, P = 0.017). 30POP outcomes were largely equivalent, except that OG had higher risk for bleeding (14.6% versus 8%, P = 0.012) and pneumonia (8.7% versus 4.5%, P = 0.044).
While laparoscopic repairs take longer, they lead to shorter hospital stays and higher likelihood of discharge home. Further study to identify patients that are candidates for this technique is warranted.

BACKGROUND: Our previous research has shown American Society of Anaesthesiologists physical status classification (ASA) score and Americal College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS NSQIP) calculator to have the most accuracy in the prediction of postoperative mortality.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of our research was to define the most reliable combination of cardiac biomarkers with ASA and ACS NSQIP.
METHODS: We have included a total of 78 patients. ASA score has been determined in standard fashion, while we used the available interactive calculator for the ACS NSQIP score. Biomarkers BIRC5, H-FABP, and hsCRP have been measured in specialized laboratories.
RESULTS: All of the deceased patients had survivin (BIRC5) > 4.00 pg/ml, higher values of H-FABP and hsCRP and higher estimated levels of ASA and ACS NSQIP (P = 0.0001). ASA and ACS NSQIP alone had AUC of, respectively, 0.669 and 0.813. The combination of ASA and ACS NSQIP had AUC = 0.841. Combination of hsCRP with the two risk scores had AUC = 0.926 (95% CI 0.853-1.000, P < 0.0001). If we add three cardiac biomarkers to this model, we get AUC as high as 0.941 (95% CI 0.876-1.000, P < 0.0001). The correction of statistical models with comorbidities (CIRS-G score) did not change the accuracy of prediction models that we have provided.
CONCLUSIONS: Addition of ACS NSQIP and biomarkers adds to the accuracy of ASA score, which has already been proved by other authors.
CONCLUSIONS: Cardiac biomarker hsCRP can be used as the most reliable cardiac biomarker; however, the \"multimarker approach\" adds the most to the accuracy of the combination of clinical risk scores.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study is to evaluate the impact of concurrent mesh herniorrhaphy on short-term outcomes of colorectal surgery by using a large, nationwide database.
METHODS: Patients who underwent simultaneous ventral hernia repair (VHR) and colorectal surgery between 2005 and 2010 were identified from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program. Patients who underwent VHR with mesh repair were case matched with patients who underwent VHR without mesh based on the type of colorectal procedure, diagnosis, and American Society of Anesthesiologists score.
RESULTS: Two hundred sixty-two patients who underwent VHR with mesh were case matched with 524 patients who underwent VHR without mesh. Mean operating time was significantly longer in patients who underwent VHR with mesh (195.8 ± 98.7 vs 164.3 ± 84.4 minutes, P < .001). Postoperative morbidity (P = .58), mortality (P = .27), superficial surgical site infection (SSI) (P = .14), deep SSI (P = .38), organ space SSI (P = .17), wound disruption (P > .99), reoperation (P = .48), and length of hospital stay (P = .71) were comparable between the groups.
CONCLUSIONS: The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program data suggest that VHR with mesh does not increase 30-day mortality, medical or surgical morbidity in colorectal surgery setting.