Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Evaluation of the ACS NSQIP surgical risk calculator in patients undergoing pelvic organ prolapse surgery.
Wherley, Susan D; Chapman, Graham C; Mahajan, Sangeeta T; Hijaz, Adonis K; Slopnick, Emily A; Roberts, Kasey; El-Nashar, Sherif.
Afiliação
  • Wherley SD; University Hospitals Cleveland Medical Center, Cleveland, OH, USA. susan.wherley@uhhospitals.org.
  • Chapman GC; University Hospitals Cleveland Medical Center, Cleveland, OH, USA.
  • Mahajan ST; University Hospitals Cleveland Medical Center, Cleveland, OH, USA.
  • Hijaz AK; University Hospitals Cleveland Medical Center, Cleveland, OH, USA.
  • Slopnick EA; University Hospitals Cleveland Medical Center, Cleveland, OH, USA.
  • Roberts K; University Hospitals Cleveland Medical Center, Cleveland, OH, USA.
  • El-Nashar S; University Hospitals Cleveland Medical Center, Cleveland, OH, USA.
Int Urogynecol J ; 31(10): 2089-2094, 2020 10.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32556848
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION AND

HYPOTHESIS:

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of the American College of Surgeons National Surgery Quality Improvement Program (ACS NSQIP) surgical risk calculator in predicting postoperative complications in patients undergoing pelvic organ prolapse surgery.

METHODS:

We performed a retrospective review of 354 patients who underwent surgery for pelvic organ prolapse from 2013 to 2017 at a single academic institution. Patient medical information and surgical procedure were entered into the calculator to obtain predicted complication rates, which were compared with observed complications. Logistic regression, C-statistic, and Brier score were used to assess the accuracy of the calculator.

RESULTS:

Of 354 patients included in the analysis, 79.7% were under the age of 75, and 41.5% were classified as American Society of Anesthesiologists class ≥3. The majority of patients underwent robotic sacrocolpopexy (40.7%) or uterosacral ligament suspension (36.4%), followed by colpocleisis, abdominal sacrocolpopexy, and extraperitoneal suspension. Complications were experienced by 100 patients (28.3%). Most common complications were urinary tract infection (n = 57), surgical site infection (n = 42), and readmission (n = 16); other complications were rare. The surgical risk calculator displayed poor predictive ability for experiencing a complication (C-statistic = 0.547, Brier score = 0.25).

CONCLUSIONS:

The NSQIP surgical risk calculator displayed poor predictive ability in our cohort of patients undergoing surgery for pelvic organ prolapse, suggesting that this tool might have limited clinical applicability to individual patients in this population.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Robótica / Prolapso de Órgão Pélvico Tipo de estudo: Etiology_studies / Observational_studies / Prognostic_studies / Risk_factors_studies Limite: Humans Idioma: En Revista: Int Urogynecol J Assunto da revista: GINECOLOGIA / UROLOGIA Ano de publicação: 2020 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: Estados Unidos

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Robótica / Prolapso de Órgão Pélvico Tipo de estudo: Etiology_studies / Observational_studies / Prognostic_studies / Risk_factors_studies Limite: Humans Idioma: En Revista: Int Urogynecol J Assunto da revista: GINECOLOGIA / UROLOGIA Ano de publicação: 2020 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: Estados Unidos