Article

The intraoperative Surgical Apgar Score predicts postdischarge complications after colon and rectal resection

Department of Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA 02114, USA.
Surgery (Impact Factor: 3.11). 03/2010; 148(3):559-66. DOI: 10.1016/j.surg.2010.01.015
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT We previously developed an intraoperative 10-point Surgical Apgar Score-based on blood loss, lowest heart rate, and lowest mean arterial pressure-to predict major complications after colorectal resection. However, because complications often arise after uncomplicated hospitalizations, we sought to evaluate whether this intraoperative metric would predict postdischarge complications after colectomy.
We linked our institution's National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database with an Anesthesia Intraoperative Management System for all colorectal resections over 4 years. Using Chi-square trend tests and logistic regression, we evaluated the Surgical Apgar Score's prediction for major postoperative complications before and after discharge.
Among 795 colectomies, there were 230 (29%) major complications within 30 days; 45 (20%) after uncomplicated discharges. Surgical Apgar Scores predicted both inpatient complications and late postdischarge complications (both P < .0001). Late complications occurred from 0 to 27 (median, 11) days after discharge; the most common were surgical site infections (42%), sepsis (24%), and venous thromboembolism (16%). In pairwise comparisons against average-scoring patients (Surgical Apgar Scores, 7-8), the relative risk of postdischarge complications trended lower, to 0.6 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.2-1.7) for those with the best scores (9-10); and were significantly higher, at 2.6 (95% CI, 1.4-4.9) for scores 5-6, and 4.5 (95% CI, 1.8-11.0) for scores 0-4.
The intraoperative Surgical Apgar Score remained a useful metric for predicting postcolectomy complications arising after uncomplicated discharges. Even late complications may thus be related to intraoperative condition and events. Surgeons could use this intraoperative metric to target low-scoring patients for intensive postdischarge surveillance and mitigation of postdischarge complications after colectomy.

0 Followers
 · 
129 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) may suffer significant economic hardship during treatment. Complications are common after surgery for CRC and may exacerbate the financial burden of CRC even further. METHODS: Within a population-based survey of patients with stage III CRC, the authors investigated the effects of disease and treatment on personal finances and computed a composite measure of financial burden. Correlations were examined between components of financial burden and patient-reported postoperative complications using chi-square analyses, and Mantel-Haenszel chi-square tend tests were used to evaluate correlations between composite financial burden scores and surgical complications, controlling for patient characteristics and other factors by using multivariable Poisson regression. RESULTS: Among 937 respondents, 224 (24%) reported complications after surgery. Those with complications had significantly higher composite financial burden (P < .001 for trend): they were more likely to spend savings (40% vs 31%; P = .01), borrow or take loans (18% vs 11%; P = .007), fail to make credit card payments (18% vs 11%; P = .005), reduce spending for food or clothes (38% vs 27%; P = .001), and decrease recreational activities (41% vs 33%; P = .03). They took significantly longer to return to work (P = .009) and were more likely to experience significant worry about finances (61% vs 52%; P = .01). CONCLUSIONS: Complications after surgery for CRC result in significant personal financial consequences as well as morbidity. Financial stress impairs quality of life and may prevent adherence to recommended treatments. Therefore, patients who suffer complications may require not just additional clinical care but also economic support and services. (C) 2014 American Cancer Society.
    Cancer 10/2014; 120(19). DOI:10.1002/cncr.28812 · 4.90 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: INTRODUCTION: The surgical Apgar score (SAS) can predict 30-day major complications or death after surgery. Studies have validated the score in different patient populations and suggest it should be used to objectively guide postoperative care. We aimed to see whether using the SAS in a decisive approach in a future randomised controlled trial (RCT) would be likely to demonstrate an effect on postoperative care and clinical outcome. METHODS: A total of 143 adults undergoing general/vascular surgery in 9 National Health Service hospitals were recruited to a pilot single blinded RCT and the data for 139 of these were analysed. Participants were randomised to a control group with standard postoperative care or to an intervention group with care influenced (but not mandated) by the SAS (decisive approach). The notional primary outcome was 30-day major complications or death. RESULTS: Incidence of major complications was similar in both groups (control: 20/69 [29%], intervention: 23/70 [33%], p=0.622). Immediate admissions to the critical care unit was higher in the intervention group, especially in the SAS 0-4 subgroup (4/6 vs 2/7) although this was not statistically significant (p=0.310). Validity was also confirmed in area under the curve (AUC) analysis (AUC: 0.77). CONCLUSIONS: This pilot study found that a future RCT to investigate the effect of using the SAS in a decisive approach may demonstrate a difference in postoperative care. However, significant changes to the design are needed if differences in clinical outcome are to be achieved reliably. These would include a wider array of postoperative interventions implemented using a quality improvement approach in a stepped wedge cluster design with blinded collection of outcome data.
    Annals of The Royal College of Surgeons of England 07/2014; 96(5-5):352-8. DOI:10.1308/003588414X13946184900840 · 1.22 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: A patient undergoing surgery may receive anesthesia care from several anesthesia providers. The safety of anesthesia care transitions has not been evaluated. Using unconditional and conditional multivariable logistic regression models, we tested whether the number of attending anesthesiologists involved in an operation was associated with postoperative complications. In a cohort of patients undergoing elective colorectal surgical in an academic tertiary care center with a stable anesthesia care team model participating in the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program, using unconditional and conditional multivariable logistic regression models, we tested adjusted associations between numbers of attending anesthesiologists and occurrence of death or a major complication (acute renal failure, bleeding that required a transfusion of 4 units or more of red blood cells within 72 hours after surgery, cardiac arrest requiring cardiopulmonary resuscitation, coma of 24 hours or longer, myocardial infarction, unplanned intubation, ventilator use for 48 hours or more, pneumonia, stroke, wound disruption, deep or organ-space surgical-site infection, superficial surgical-site infection, sepsis, septic shock, systemic inflammatory response syndrome). We identified 927 patients who underwent elective colectomy of comparable surgical intensity. In all, 71 (7.7%) patients had major nonfatal complications or death. One anesthesiologist provided care for 530 (57%) patients, 2 anesthesiologists for 287 (31%), and 3 or more for 110 (12%). The number of attending anesthesiologists was associated with increased odds of postoperative complication (unadjusted odds ratio [OR] = 1.52, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.18-1.96, P = 0.0013; adjusted OR = 1.44, 95% CI 1.09-1.91, P = 0.0106). In sensitivity analyses, occurrence of a complication was significantly associated with the number of in-room providers, defined as anesthesia residents and nurse anesthetists (adjusted OR = 1.39, 95% CI 1.01-1.92, P = 0.0446) and for all anesthesia providers (adjusted OR = 1.58, 95%CI 1.20-2.08, P = 0.0012). Findings persisted across multiple, alternative adjustments, sensitivity analyses, and conditional logistic regression with matching on operative duration. In our study, care by additional attending anesthesiologists and in-room providers was independently associated with an increased odds of postoperative complications. These findings challenge the assumption that anesthesia transitions are care neutral and not contributory to surgical outcomes.
    Anesthesia and analgesia 03/2015; DOI:10.1213/ANE.0000000000000692 · 3.42 Impact Factor

Preview

Download
1 Download
Available from