acs-nsqip

ACS - NSQIP
  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景技术手术部位感染(SSIs)在接受胰腺切除术的患者中仍然是具有挑战性的问题。有趣的是,胰腺切除术后使用负压伤口治疗(NPWT)治疗癌症与SSI降低相关.这项研究的目的是使用国家外科数据库比较远端胰腺切除术或胰十二指肠切除术后切口伤口护理的NPWT和非NPWT的术后结果。方法2005年至2019年,美国外科医生学会国家外科质量改进计划(ACS-NSQIP)对接受远端胰腺切除术或胰十二指肠切除术的患者进行胰腺诊断使用主要的当前程序术语(CPT)代码。主要结果是NPWT和非NPWT患者组之间的手术部位感染率。次要结果包括脓毒症,感染性休克,重新接纳,再操作。使用多变量逻辑回归比较感兴趣的结果。结果54,457例患者接受了胰腺切除术,其中131例接受了NPWT。多变量分析,在考虑患者特征的同时,包括伤口分类,术后浅表SSI无差异,深SSI,脓毒症,感染性休克,或在NPWT和非NPWT组之间重新接纳。NPWT组的器官空间SSI较高(21%vs12%,p=0.001)。与手术相关的再手术在NPWT组中也很高(14%vs4.3%,p<0.001)。结论NPWT在远端胰腺切除术和胰十二指肠切除术中的使用与器官间隙SSIs增加和再次手术率相关。表面SSI没有差异,深SSI,或重新接纳。这项大样本研究表明,在胰腺切除术后使用NPWT切口伤口护理没有明显的好处。
    Introduction Surgical site infections (SSIs) continue to be a challenging issue among patients undergoing pancreatectomy. Anecdotally, the use of negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) following pancreatectomy for cancer has been associated with decreased SSIs. The objective of this study was to compare the postoperative outcomes of NPWT and non-NPWT for incisional wound care following distal pancreatectomy or pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic diagnoses using a national surgical database. Methods The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) was queried from 2005 to 2019 for patients undergoing distal pancreatectomy or pancreaticoduodenectomy for pancreatic diagnoses using primary Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes. The primary outcome was surgical site infection rates between NPWT and non-NPWT patient groups. Secondary outcomes include sepsis, septic shock, readmission, and reoperation. Outcomes of interest were compared using multivariate logistic regression. Results A total of 54,457 patients underwent pancreatectomy with 131 receiving NPWT. Multivariate analysis, while accounting for patient characteristics, including wound classification, showed no difference in postoperative superficial SSI, deep SSI, sepsis, septic shock, or readmission between the NPWT and non-NPWT groups. Organ space SSI was higher in the NPWT group (21% vs 12%, p=0.001). Reoperation related to procedure was also high in the NPWT group (14% vs 4.3%, p<0.001). Conclusion The use of NPWT in distal pancreatectomies and pancreatoduodenectomies is associated with increased organ space SSIs and reoperation rates, with no difference in superficial SSI, deep SSI, or readmission. This large sample study shows no significant benefit of using NPWT incisional wound care after pancreatectomy.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    关于急诊手术患者术前风险评估工具的研究很少。本研究评估了急性生理学和慢性健康评估(APACHE)II的性能,美国外科医生学会国家外科质量改进计划(ACS-NSQIP)手术风险计算器和美国麻醉医师协会(ASA)身体状况(PS)分类系统在接受紧急剖腹手术的患者中。
    这项回顾性研究纳入了60例因穿孔性腹膜炎行紧急剖腹探查术的成年患者。临床细节,ASAPS分类,我们从病历中检索了患者的实验室检查和术后病程.基于这些细节,计算患者的APACHEII和ACS-NSQIP。该研究的主要结果是术前APACHEII的准确性,ACS-NSQIP风险计算器和ASAPS等级预测患者术后30天死亡率。
    APACHEII的曲线下面积(AUC),ACS-NSQIP评分,术后30天死亡率和ASAPS分级分别为0.737,0.694和0.601.评分系统的Hosmer-Lemeshow(H-L)检验的P值分别为0.05、0.25和0.05。APACHEII术后并发症的AUC为0.799,ACS-NSQIP为0.683,ASAPS分类为0.601。这些手术后并发症评分系统的H-L检验显示P值分别为0.62、0.36和0.53。
    与ACS-NSQIP和ASAPS分类系统相比,APACHEⅡ评分对接受急诊剖腹探查手术的成年患者术后并发症和死亡率具有更好的辨别能力.
    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.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    引言有人提出,伴随胆囊切除术的疝修补术增加了由于潜在的网状物污染而导致的术后并发症的风险。这项研究比较了进行腹侧疝修补术(VHR)伴和不伴胆囊切除术(CCY)的患者的术后结局和并发症。方法采用美国外科医师学会国家外科质量改进计划(ACSNSQIP)数据库,从2005年到2019年,我们使用当前的手术术语(CPT)代码49652-49657(腹腔镜)和49560-49566(开放)查询了接受腹疝修补术的患者,不管有没有胆囊切除术.ACSNSQIP是一个潜在的,对接受大型普外科手术的患者进行系统研究,汇总了200多家医院的数据。排除了涉及其他伴随程序的病例。感兴趣的主要结果是30天死亡率,逗留时间,重新接纳,返回手术室(OR),术后并发症。使用多变量二项逻辑回归计算主要结局的比值比,以控制患者的危险因素。结果总计,确认了167586例,仅腹疝修补术165,758例,1,828例腹侧疝修补术同时行胆囊切除术。30天死亡率没有差异,逗留时间,重新接纳,回到手术室,或术后并发症。与仅接受VHR的患者相比,同时接受VHR/CCY的患者,手术部位感染率无差异(1.86%vs.1.97%,P=0.57)或败血症(0.82%vs.0.41%,P=0.10)。结论在一个大的国家样本中,术后结局无显著差异,特别是感染相关并发症,比较VHR和并发VHR/CCY时。我们的发现表明,同时进行腹侧疝修补术和胆囊切除术的患者风险不会增加。因此,外科医生可能会考虑这种组合方法来提供最佳的基于价值的护理,特别是当它可以消除第二次手术的需要和感染的风险很低时。需要进行具有更多程序特异性信息的前瞻性研究,以进行疝修补和胆囊切除术的适应症,但是在缺乏急性感染迹象的胆囊切除术病例中,在相同的情况下执行两种程序可能是安全的。
    Introduction It has been suggested that hernia repair with concomitant cholecystectomy increases the risk of postoperative complications due to potential mesh contamination. This study compares postoperative outcomes and complications between patients who underwent ventral hernia repair (VHR) with and without concomitant cholecystectomy (CCY). Methods Using the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS NSQIP) database, from 2005 to 2019, we queried patients who underwent ventral hernia repairs using the current procedural terminology (CPT) codes 49652-49657 (laparoscopic) and 49560-49566 (open), with or without cholecystectomy. The ACS NSQIP is a prospective, systematic study of patients who underwent major general surgical procedures aggregating data from over 200 hospitals. Cases involving additional concomitant procedures were excluded. Primary outcomes of interest were 30-day mortality, length of stay, readmission, return to operating room (OR), and postoperative complications. The odds ratio for primary outcomes was calculated using multivariable binomial logistic regression to control for patient risk factors. Results In total, 167586 cases were identified, 165,758 ventral hernia repairs alone, and 1,828 ventral hernia repairs with concomitant cholecystectomy. There was no difference in 30-day mortality, length of stay, readmission, return to the operating room, or postoperative complications between groups. Patients who underwent simultaneous VHR/CCY when compared to those who had VHR alone, had no differences in the rate of surgical site infections (1.86% vs. 1.97%, P = 0.57) or sepsis (0.82% vs. 0.41%, P = 0.10).  Conclusion In a large national sample, there is no significant difference in postoperative outcomes, specifically infection-related complications, when comparing VHR along with concurrent VHR/CCY. Our findings suggest no increased risks for patients undergoing concurrent ventral hernia repair and cholecystectomy. Hence, surgeons might consider this combined approach to offer the best value-based care, especially when it could eliminate the need for a second operation and the risk of infection is low. Prospective studies with more procedural-specific information for hernia repairs and indications for cholecystectomy are needed however it is likely safe to perform both procedures during the same setting in cholecystectomy cases lacking signs of acute infection.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    介绍由于各种潜在的病理,腰椎椎间融合已经被用于缓解背痛并提高稳定性。前路椎间融合和后路椎间融合是经典比较的两种主要方法。为了比较这两种脊柱方法,进行了大型回顾性国家数据库审查,以比较和预测术后30天的结局;然而,他们有相互矛盾的发现。肥胖,定义为体重指数(BMI)超过30kg/m2,也可能有助于脊柱病理的程度,并与术后并发症的发生率增加有关。肥胖患者的并发症发生率尚未使用大型国家数据库进行彻底调查。我们目前的调查旨在使用美国外科医生协会国家外科质量改善计划(ACS-NSQIP)数据库进行比较。本研究的目的是利用全国范围的前瞻性数据库来确定肥胖患者腰椎后路和前路融合术后结果的短期差异,并将这些发现与先前在普通人群中的研究联系起来。方法对2015年至2019年ACS-NSQIP数据库中9,021例患者资料进行回顾性队列分析,通过前或后手术入路进行单层融合。该数据库捕获了150多个关于单个患者病例的临床变量,包括人口统计数据,术前危险因素和实验室值,术中数据,和显著事件直到术后30天。所有结局指标均纳入本分析,并特别注意深静脉血栓形成(DVT)和肺栓塞(PE)的发生率。延长住院时间(LOS),再操作,和操作时间。结果多变量分析控制年龄,BMI,性别,种族,功能状态,美国麻醉医师协会(ASA)班,和选定的合并症(P<0.05)表明,前入路是所有重要结局的独立预测因素,除了住院时间延长。与后路相比,前路手术总时间较短(B=-13.257,95%置信区间(CI)[-17.522,-8.992],P<0.001),深静脉血栓形成的几率更高(比值比(OR)=2.210,95%CI[1.211,4.033],P=0.010),肺栓塞的几率更高(OR=2.679,95%CI[1.311,5.477],P=0.007),并且可以防止计划外的再次手术(OR=0.702,95%CI[0.548,0.898],P=0.005)。结论肥胖人群在接受脊柱手术的人群中构成了大量且不断增长的人群,因此,调查差异是恰当的,优势,和该组腰椎融合方法的缺点。虽然前路入路可以保护较长的手术时间和计划外的再次手术,当考虑到DVT和PE风险增加时,这种获益在临床上可能并不显著.鉴于该数据集的短期性质以及大型去识别回顾性数据库研究固有的局限性,这些发现被谨慎地解释.为了进一步阐明这些细微差别,有必要进行长期随访研究,以混淆变量和以脊柱为中心的结果。
    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.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:美国外科医生学会国家外科质量改进计划手术风险计算器(ACS-NSQIPSRC)旨在预测发病率和死亡率,并帮助对手术患者进行分层。这项研究评估了接受结直肠癌肝转移(CRLM)手术的患者的SRC性能。
    方法:SRC回顾性计算了2011年至2020年在两个高级转诊中心接受肝脏或同时进行结肠和肝脏手术治疗结直肠癌(CRC)的患者。C-statistics和Brier评分分别计算为辨别和校准的平均值,在同时进行肝结肠手术的情况下,对于两组和每个级别的外科医生调整评分(SAS)进行肝切除。AUC≥0.7显示可接受的区分;Brier分数在0附近表示预测工具具有良好的校准。
    结果:纳入400名患者,153例同时切除,和257只接受肝脏切除术。对于同时手术,ACS-NSQIPSRC仅在心脏并发症中显示出良好的校准和辨别(AUC=0.720,0.740和0.702,SAS-2和SAS-3分别;结肠切除术为0.714;Brier评分在每种情况下=0.04)。对于肝脏手术,它仅显示心脏并发症的良好校准(Brier评分=0.03).SRC低估了整体并发症的发生率,肺炎,心脏并发症,以及住院时间的长短。
    结论:ACS-NSQIPSRC仅对5个评估结果中的1个显示出良好的预测能力;因此,对于接受CRLM肝脏手术的患者来说,它不是一个可靠的工具,同时和分阶段切除。
    The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program surgical risk calculator (ACS-NSQIP SRC) has been designed to predict morbidity and mortality and help stratify surgical patients. This study evaluates the performance of the SRC for patients undergoing surgery for colorectal liver metastases (CRLM).
    SRC was retrospectively computed for patients undergoing liver or simultaneous colon and liver surgery for colorectal cancer (CRC) in two high tertiary referral centres from 2011 to 2020. C-statistics and Brier score were calculated as a mean of discrimination and calibration respectively, for both group and for every level of surgeon adjustment score (SAS) for liver resections in case of simultaneous liver-colon surgery. An AUC ≥ 0.7 shows acceptable discrimination; a Brier score next to 0 means the prediction tool has good calibration.
    Four hundred ten patients were included, 153 underwent simultaneous resection, and 257 underwent liver-only resections. For simultaneous surgery, the ACS-NSQIP SRC showed good calibration and discrimination only for cardiac complication (AUC = 0.720, 0.740, and 0.702 for liver resection unadjusted, SAS-2, and SAS-3 respectively; 0.714 for colon resection; and Brier score = 0.04 in every case). For liver-only surgery, it only showed good calibration for cardiac complications (Brier score = 0.03). The SRC underestimated the incidence of overall complications, pneumonia, cardiac complications, and the length of hospital stay.
    ACS-NSQIP SRC showed good predicting capabilities only for 1 out of 5 evaluated outcomes; therefore, it is not a reliable tool for patients undergoing liver surgery for CRLM, both in the simultaneous and staged resections.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    目的:探讨种族/民族对胰腺癌胰十二指肠切除术后手术结果的影响。
    方法:回顾性回顾了2014年至2019年在国家手术质量改善计划(NSQIP)数据库中接受胰十二指肠切除术治疗腺癌的患者。比较患者和肿瘤特征以及术后30天的结果。采用多变量logistic和线性回归模型来研究种族/民族与手术结局之间的关系。
    结果:纳入了6,000名患者(84.5%的白人,7.9%黑色,3%西班牙裔,4.6%亚洲人)。较大比例的黑人术前患有美国麻醉医师协会3级或4级。在肿瘤特征或手术技巧方面没有显着差异。与黑人和白人相比,亚洲人和西班牙裔接受新辅助化疗和/或放疗的比例较小。相对于白色,黑人种族与术后脓毒症和再次手术独立相关.黑人和西班牙裔种族/种族都与插管时间延长和胃排空延迟有关,少数民族种族/民族与住院时间延长相关。相对于白色,西班牙裔,和亚洲种族/民族与接受新辅助治疗(NAT)的可能性较低独立相关.
    结论:在ACS-NSQIP参与的医院中,非白种人/民族与胰腺癌切除术后的不良结局独立相关.在接受手术切除的亚洲和西班牙裔患者中,NAT接收可能存在差异。
    OBJECTIVE: To investigate the impact of race/ethnicity on surgical outcomes following pancreaticoduodenectomy for pancreatic cancer.
    METHODS: A retrospective review of patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy for adenocarcinoma in the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database from 2014 to 2019. Patient and tumor characteristics and 30-day postoperative outcomes were compared. Multivariable logistic and linear regression models were conducted to investigate the relationship between race/ethnicity and surgical outcomes.
    RESULTS: Six thousand five hundred and sixty-two patients were included (84.5% White, 7.9% Black, 3% Hispanic, 4.6% Asian). Larger proportions of Blacks had preoperative American Society of Anesthesiologists class 3 or 4. There were no significant differences in tumor characteristics or operative techniques. A smaller proportion of Asians and Hispanics received neoadjuvant chemotherapy and/or radiation than Blacks and Whites. Relative to White, the Black race was independently associated with postoperative sepsis and reoperation. Both Black and Hispanic race/ethnicity were associated with prolonged intubation and delayed gastric emptying, and minorities races/ethnicities were associated with longer length of hospital stay. Relative to White, Hispanic, and Asian race/ethnicity were independently associated with a lower likelihood of neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) receipt.
    CONCLUSIONS: In ACS-NSQIP participating hospitals, non-White race/ethnicity was independently associated with adverse outcomes after pancreatic cancer resection. A possible disparity in NAT receipt may exist in Asian and Hispanic patients undergoing surgical resection.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    目的:评估常见良性泌尿外科重建患者围手术期静脉血栓栓塞(VTE)的发生率。我们假设这个比率将低于先前描述的。
    方法:我们利用2015年至2019年的美国外科医师学会国家外科质量改善项目数据库来评估30天围手术期VTE的风险。使用当前程序术语(CPT)代码选择≥18岁接受良性泌尿系统重建病例的患者。人口统计,合并症,和手术变量被捕获。主要结果是术后30天内的VTE。
    结果:我们确定了8467例符合纳入标准的患者。大多数患者为男性(>95%),平均年龄为65岁,BMI为29.6。围手术期30天内发生23例VTE事件(0.27%)。14例(14/59)手术有围手术期VTE。在单因素分析中,包括手术时间和肥胖在内的许多传统因素都显着增加了VTE的风险。在多变量分析中,只有BMI(OR1.09;95%CI1.01-1.12)和住院状态(OR4.42;95%CI1.9-10.2)与围手术期VTE增加相关.
    结论:良性泌尿外科重建患者的VTE发生率较低。除了其他已知的VTE危险因素外,提供者应继续有较高的怀疑指数,特别是对于高BMI的住院患者。
    OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the rate of perioperative venous thromboembolism (VTE) among patients undergoing common benign urologic reconstructive cases. We hypothesize that this rate will be lower than previously described.
    METHODS: We utilized the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Project database from 2015 to 2019 to evaluate 30-day perioperative risk of VTE. Patients ≥ 18 years old undergoing benign urologic reconstructive cases were selected using Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes. Demographic, comorbidity, and operative variables were captured. The primary outcome was VTE within the 30-day postoperative period.
    RESULTS: We identified 8467 patients who met inclusion criteria. The majority of patients were male (> 95%) with an average age of 65 and BMI of 29.6. There were 23 VTE events (0.27%) within the 30-day perioperative period. Fourteen (14/59) procedures had a perioperative VTE. Many of the traditional factors for VTE including operative time and obesity significantly increased risk of VTE in univariate analysis. In multivariate analysis, only BMI (OR 1.09; 95% CI 1.01-1.12) and inpatient status (OR 4.42; 95% CI 1.9-10.2) were correlated with increased perioperative VTE.
    CONCLUSIONS: The rate of VTE among patients undergoing benign urologic reconstructive cases is low. Providers should continue to have high index of suspicion particularly for inpatients with high BMI in addition to other known risk factors for VTE.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    未经评估:各种评分系统有助于在术前对患者的风险进行分类,从而决定最佳的可用治疗方案。ACS-NSQIP评分已在临床实践中引入数年。进行这项研究是为了找出ACS-NSQIP评分的预测死亡率与沙特人口中观察到的死亡率之间是否存在任何差异。
    UNASSIGNED:这项前瞻性观察研究是在安全部队医院进行的,利雅得,沙特阿拉伯王国。我们纳入了在我们医院接受择期和急诊外科手术的患者。收集30天死亡率数据,然后计算观察与预期(O/E)死亡率的比率。我们研究的样本量为九百三(903)名患者。
    未经评估:本研究的ACS-NSQIP死亡风险平均评分(%)为0.49。预期死亡率为4.42,而观察到的死亡率为11,O/E比为2.48(p值0.000)。我们没有发现预期死亡率和观察死亡率之间的显著差异,除了ASA3级和4级患者,其中预期死亡率低于观察到的(p值<0.05)。
    UNASSIGNED:ACS-NSQIP可以可靠地用于术后死亡率预测,尤其是在低风险人群中。
    UNASSIGNED: Various scoring systems help in classifying the patient\'s risk preoperatively and hence to decide the best available treatment option. ACS-NSQIP score has been introduced in clinical practice for few years. This study was done to find out whether there is any difference between predicted mortality from ACS-NSQIP score and observed mortality in Saudi population.
    UNASSIGNED: This prospective observational study was conducted at Security Forces Hospital, Riyadh, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. We included patients undergoing elective and emergency surgical procedures in our hospital. Thirty days mortality data was collected and then observed to expected (O/E) mortality ratio was calculated. The sample size for our study was nine hundred and three (903) patients.
    UNASSIGNED: The mean ACS-NSQIP mortality risk score (%) for the study was 0.49. Expected number of mortalities was 4.42 while observed mortalities were 11, yielding an O/E ratio of 2.48 (p-value 0.000). We did not find a significant difference between expected and observed mortalities except for ASA class 3 and 4 patients where expected numbers of mortalities were lower than observed (p-value < 0.05).
    UNASSIGNED: ACS-NSQIP can be reliably used for postoperative mortality prediction especially in lower risk groups.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:糖尿病是几种慢性和急性疾病的公认风险,包括食管癌手术并发症的增加。我们的主要目的是确定糖尿病对食管切除术后手术和内科并发症的影响。
    方法:提取并分析了2016-2018年美国外科医生学会国家外科质量改善计划(ACSNSQIP)数据集中反映的所有恶性肿瘤食管切除术。当前使用的程序术语(CPT)代码为1)开放程序(43107、43108、43112、43113、43116、43117、43118、43121、43122和43123)和2)混合程序(43186、43287和43288)。Logistic回归模型检查了糖尿病状态和不良结局之间的关联。这些协会根据性别进行了调整,种族,年龄组,运营年,CPT代码,体重指数(BMI),吸烟,充血性心力衰竭,抗高血压药,肾功能衰竭,和呼吸困难.
    结果:确定了两千五百三十八例食管切除术。86.45%(n=2,194)接受开放手术,13.55%(n=344)接受混合手术。有177名胰岛素依赖型糖尿病患者(IDDM)和320名(12.61%)非胰岛素依赖型糖尿病患者(NIDDM)。84.14%为男性,77.74%为白种人。89.48%的患者年龄在50至79岁之间。40.27%出现术后并发症。医疗并发症(比值比[OR]:1.7,p值:0.002),手术并发症(OR:1.9,p值:<0.001),伤口并发症(OR:2.9,p值:<0.001),吻合口漏(OR:2.4,p值:<0.001)在糖尿病患者中更常见。亚组分析表明,在混合手术中,手术并发症的OR有统计学上的显着增加(OR:3.61,p值:0.05),医疗并发症(OR:3.76,p值:0.04),与NIDDM相比,IDDM和吻合口漏(OR:3.49,p值:0.27)。
    结论:与非糖尿病患者相比,胰岛素依赖型糖尿病使所有主要并发症的风险加倍。当考虑手术方法和糖尿病状态(IDDM与非糖尿病患者相比,NIDDM与非糖尿病患者),与开放手术相比,混合食管切除术的并发症风险进一步增加一倍.
    BACKGROUND: Diabetes is a recognised risk for several chronic and acute illnesses, including increased complications in surgery for oesophageal cancer. Our primary aim is to determine the impact of diabetes on postoperative surgical and medical complications after oesophagectomy.
    METHODS: All oesophagectomies for malignancy as reflected in the 2016-2018 American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS NSQIP) datasets were extracted and analysed. Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes used were 1) open procedures (43107, 43108, 43112, 43113, 43116, 43117, 43118, 43121, 43122, and 43123) and 2) hybrid procedures (43186, 43287, and 43288). Logistic regression models examined associations between diabetic status and adverse outcomes. The associations were adjusted for sex, race, age group, operation year, CPT code, body mass index (BMI), smoking, congestive heart failure, antihypertensives, renal failure, and dyspnoea.
    RESULTS: Two thousand five hundred and thirty-eight oesophagectomies were identified. 86.45% (n=2,194) underwent open procedures and 13.55% (n=344) had hybrid procedures. There were 177 insulin-dependent diabetics (IDDM) and 320 (12.61%) non-insulin-dependent diabetics (NIDDM). 84.14% were male and 77.74% were Caucasian. 89.48% of the patients were between 50 and 79 years of age. 40.27% experienced postoperative complications. Medical complications (odds ratio [OR]: 1.7, p-value: 0.002), surgical complications (OR: 1.9, p-value: <0.001), wound complications (OR: 2.9, p-value: <0.001), and anastomotic leaks (OR: 2.4, p-value: <0.001) were more common in diabetic patients. Subgroup analysis showed that in hybrid procedures, there is a statistically significant increase in the OR of surgical complications (OR: 3.61, p-value: 0.05), medical complications (OR: 3.76, p-value: 0.04), and anastomotic leak (OR: 3.49, p-value: 0.27) in IDDM as compared to NIDDM.
    CONCLUSIONS: Insulin-dependent diabetes doubles the risk of all major complications compared to nondiabetics. When considering surgical approach and diabetic status (IDDM vs nondiabetics, NIDDM vs nondiabetics), the risk of complications further doubles for hybrid oesophagectomies compared to open procedures.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    BACKGROUND: Patient selection for outpatient total joint arthroplasty (TJA) is important for optimizing patient outcomes. This study develops machine learning models that may aid in patient selection for outpatient TJA based on medical comorbidities and demographic factors.
    METHODS: This study queried elective total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and total hip arthroplasty (THA) cases during 2010-2018 in the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program. Artificial neural network models predicted same-day discharge and length of stay (LOS) fewer than 2 days (short LOS). Multiple linear and logistic regression analyses were used to identify variables significantly associated with predicted outcomes.
    RESULTS: A total of 284,731 TKA cases and 153,053 THA cases met inclusion criteria. For TKA, prediction of short LOS had an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.767 and accuracy of 84.1%; prediction of same-day discharge had an AUC of 0.802 and accuracy of 89.2%. For THA, prediction of short LOS had an AUC of 0.757 and accuracy of 70.6%; prediction of same-day discharge had an AUC of 0.814 and accuracy of 78.8%.
    CONCLUSIONS: This study developed machine learning models for aiding patient selection for outpatient TJA, through accurately predicting short LOS or outpatient vs inpatient cases. As outpatient TJA expands, it will be important to optimize preoperative patient selection and effectively screen surgical candidates from a broader patient population. Incorporating models such as these into electronic medical records could aid in decision-making and resource planning in real time.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

公众号