Search

Background: Existing postoperative pancreatic fistula risk scores rely on intraoperative parameters, which limits their value in the preoperative setting. A preoperative predictive model to stratify the risk of developing postoperative pancreatic fistula before pancreatoduodenectomy was built and externally validated. Methods: A regression risk-tree model for preoperative postoperative pancreatic fistula risk stratification was developed in the Verona University Hospital training cohort using preoperative variables and then tested prospectively in a validation cohort of patients who underwent pancreatoduodenectomy at San Raffaele Hospital of Milan. Results: In the study period 566 (training cohort) and 456 (validation cohort) patients underwent pancreatoduodenectomy. In the multivariable analysis body mass index, radiographic main pancreatic duct diameter and American Society of Anesthesiologists score ≥3 were independently associated with postoperative pancreatic fistula. The regression tree analysis allocated patients into 3 preoperative risk groups with an 8%, 21%, and 32% risk of postoperative pancreatic fistula (all P < .01) based on main pancreatic duct diameter (≥ or

Background The universal Surgical Risk Preoperative Assessment System (SURPAS) prediction models for postoperative adverse outcomes have good accuracy for estimating risk in broad surgical populations and for surgical specialties. The accuracy in individual operations has not yet been assessed. The objective of this study was to evaluate the Surgical Risk Preoperative Assessment System in predicting adverse outcomes for selected individual operations. Methods The SURPAS models were applied to the top 2 most frequent common procedural terminology codes in 9 surgical specialties and 5 additional common general surgical operations in the 2009 to 2018 database of the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS NSQIP). Goodness of fit statistics were estimated, including c-indices for discrimination, Hosmer-Lemeshow graphs and P values for calibration, overall observed versus expected event rates, and Brier scores. Results The total sample size was 2,020,172, which represented 29% of the 6.9 million operations in the ACS NSQIP database. Average c-indices across 12 outcomes were acceptable (≥0.70) for 13 (56.5%) of the 23 operations. Overall observed-to-expected rates were similar for mortality and overall morbidity across the 23 operations. Hosmer-Lemeshow graphs over quintiles of risk comparing observed-to-expected rates of mortality and overall morbidity were similar for 52% and 70% of operations, respectively. Model performance was better in less complex operations and those done in patients with lower preoperative risk. Conclusion SURPAS displayed accuracy in estimating postoperative adverse events for some of the 23 operations studied, but not all. In the procedures where SURPAS was not accurate, developing disease or operation-specific risk models might be appropriate.

First postoperative day drain fluid amylase (DFA1)5000 U/L is commonly used for early drain removal. We manage patients with risk-stratified pancreatectomy care pathways determined preoperatively by risk for postoperative pancreatic fistula. We hypothesized that preoperative risk stratification would yield unique DFA1/DFA3 cutoffs for safe early drain removal.Patients with DFA1/DFA3 values after pancreaticoduodenectomy or distal pancreatectomy were identified. Patients were risk stratified as "low-risk pancreaticoduodenectomy," "high-risk pancreaticoduodenectomy," or "distal pancreatectomy." Receiver operator characteristic analyses yielded clinically relevant sensitivity thresholds for International Study Group on Pancreatic Surgery grade B/C postoperative pancreatic fistulas.From October 2016 to April 2018, 174 patients were preoperatively stratified as low-risk pancreaticoduodenectomy (n = 78, 45%), high-risk pancreaticoduodenectomy (n = 51, 29%), and distal pancreatectomy (n = 45, 26%). B/C postoperative pancreatic fistulas developed in 3% (n = 2) of low-risk pancreaticoduodenectomies, 37% (n = 19) of high-risk pancreaticoduodenectomies, and 24% (n = 11) of distal pancreatectomies (low- vs high-risk pancreaticoduodenectomy P.001, low-risk pancreaticoduodenectomy versus distal pancreatectomy P = .004, high-risk pancreaticoduodenectomy versus distal pancreatectomy P = .25). B/C postoperative pancreatic fistulas occurred in 16% (n = 21) pancreaticoduodenectomy patients (high- + low-risk pancreaticoduodenectomy), and B/C postoperative pancreatic fistulas were excluded in pancreaticoduodenectomy with 100% sensitivity if DFA1 ≤ 136 or DFA3 ≤ 93. DFA15000 excluded B/C postoperative pancreatic fistulas with only 57% sensitivity after pancreaticoduodenectomy. Exclusion of B/C postoperative pancreatic fistulas occurred with 100% sensitivity if DFA1 ≤ 661 or DFA3 ≤ 141 in low-risk pancreaticoduodenectomy patients, DFA1 ≤ 136 or DFA3 ≤ 93 in high-risk pancreaticoduodenectomy patients, and DFA149 or DFA326 in distal pancreatectomy patients.Preoperative risk stratification results in unique DFA1/DFA3 thresholds to exclude B/C postoperative pancreatic fistulas, thus allowing for safe drain removal and potential for accelerated discharge. Rather than applying generic DFA cutoffs based on national databases, we propose institution-specific DFA1 and DFA3 values tailored to 3 replicable postoperative pancreatic fistula-risk pathways.

Background Certain behavioral traits and inadequate social support are known risk factors for complications after cancer surgery. Despite their importance, it is unclear whether conventional patient preoperative evaluation captures them. This study was conducted to assess concordance between documentation and patient survey of selected risk factors and to determine whether failure to document affected postoperative outcomes. Methods Adult patients at a tertiary academic medical center were surveyed before abdominal cancer surgery to assess 6 psychosocial risk factors. Risk factors were also assessed by retrospective chart review and compared with survey results through concordance measures. Thirty-day postoperative complications were abstracted by chart review. Rates of major complications for those with and without clinically missed risk factors were compared. Results Comparisons between chart review and screening survey revealed poor-to-moderate positive agreement (0%–47%) for 5 risk factors and strong negative agreement (82%–99%) among all risk factors. Kappa analysis demonstrated poor-to-fair agreement among 5 risk factors (κ = 0.112–0.423). The overall complication rate was 36%. The complication rate for patients with at least 1 clinically missed risk factor was 49% vs 24% in those without (P = .021), with a similar effect replicated for each individual risk factor. Conclusion This study shows a high level of discordance between formal screening and routine clinician documentation in a preoperative setting for psychosocial risk factors. There is a significant association between missing these risk factors and worse postoperative outcomes. Future work should examine whether structured screening of psychosocial risk factors may improve preoperative risk stratification through proactive interventions.

Setting patient and family expectations for postoperative outcomes is an important aspect of care, a cornerstone of which is accurate, personalized, and explainable risk estimation. Modern machine learning offers a plethora of models that can effectively capture the complex, nonlinear contributions of preoperative risk factors to the surgical patient's overall risk. However, most of these models produce risk estimates that are not interpretable, which compromises trust in these systems, renders them unaccountable, and limits their widespread adoption. Recent developments in machine learning have been successful at creating risk calculators that address this gap, producing explainable risk estimates without compromising accuracy. In this work, we describe how the state of the art in postoperative risk estimation addresses the shortcomings of older methods, and how they have been applied in a clinical setting. We conclude with a discussion of the potential of machine learning models to be systematically integrated in health care more broadly and future prospects beyond passive risk prediction.

Background Carotid body tumors are rare, neurogenic tumors arising from the periadventitial chemoreceptive tissue of the carotid body. The purpose of this study is to ascertain the presentation and preoperative risk factors associated with surgical resection. Methods A single-center retrospective review of 25 carotid body tumor resections from 2002 to 2019. Demographics, periprocedural details, and postoperative outcomes were analyzed using Stata (Stata Corporation, College Station, TX). Results Among 25 patients, 64% were women, 84% were asymptomatic, and the mean age was 49 years (range 21–79). Forty-four percent of tumors were Shamblin III. Nine patients underwent preoperative embolization but did not correlate with decreased blood loss (299 cm3 vs 205 cm3, P = .35). The 30-day death, stroke, and cranial nerve injury rates were 0%, 8%, and 32%, respectively. Cranial nerve injuries included 20% vagus, 4% hypoglossal, 4% facial, and 4% glossopharyngeal, with permanent deficits in 4% (n = 1). Mean length of stay was 3.0 days (range 1–9 days). At a mean follow-up of 12 months (range 1–63 months), there has been no recurrence. Conclusion Although carotid body tumors are uncommon in the Midwest, complete surgical resection is curative of these typically hormonally inactive tumors. Preoperative embolization did not affect blood loss, and the incidence of death, stroke, and permanent cranial nerve injury rates remained very low.

Although laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy is considered a standard approach, 10% to 40% of these are converted. The preoperative risk factors for conversion are not well described. The aim of this study was to identify risk factors associated with conversion.Clinicopathological variables of 211 consecutive patients who underwent laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy between January 2007 and December 2015 at Johns Hopkins were analyzed to identify factors associated with conversion. Furthermore, the learning curve for laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy was studied.On univariate analysis of diabetes mellitus, preoperative diagnosis of malignant disease, multiorgan resection, surgeons' years and case experience were significantly associated with conversion (all P .05). Risk factors independently associated with conversion included diagnosis of malignant disease (odds ratio = 5.40; 95% confidence interval, 1.93-15.12, P = .001), multiorgan resection (odds ratio = 7.10; 95% confidence interval, 1.60-31.53, P = .01), and surgeons' case experience (odds ratio = 0.32; 95% confidence interval, 0.12-0.85, P = .023). Intraoperative reasons for conversion included presence of excessive intraabdominal and retroperitoneal fat (N = 10, 32.3%), adhesions (N = 10, 32.3%), extent of tumor invasion (N = 8, 25.8%), anatomy of vessels (N = 6, 19.4%), and intraoperative bleeding (N = 2, 6.5%).Patients undergoing laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy with a preoperative diagnosis of malignant disease or possible multiorgan resection are at a higher risk of conversion. Surgeon experience of performing15 procedures significantly reduces the risk of conversion.

Background Major postoperative complications are associated with increased cost and mortality. The complexity of electronic health records overwhelms physicians’ abilities to use the information for optimal and timely preoperative risk assessment. We hypothesized that data-driven, predictive-risk algorithms implemented in an intelligent decision-support platform simplify and augment physicians’ risk assessments. Methods This prospective, nonrandomized pilot study of 20 physicians at a quaternary academic medical center compared the usability and accuracy of preoperative risk assessment between physicians and MySurgeryRisk, a validated, machine-learning algorithm, using a simulated workflow for the real-time, intelligent decision-support platform. We used area under the receiver operating characteristic curve to compare the accuracy of physicians’ risk assessment for six postoperative complications before and after interaction with the algorithm for 150 clinical cases. Results The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of the MySurgeryRisk algorithm ranged between 0.73 and 0.85 and was significantly better than physicians' initial risk assessments (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve between 0.47 and 0.69) for all postoperative complications except cardiovascular. After interaction with the algorithm, the physicians significantly improved their risk assessment for acute kidney injury and for an intensive care unit admission greater than 48 hours, resulting in a net improvement of reclassification of 12% and 16%, respectively. Physicians rated the algorithm as easy to use and useful. Conclusion Implementation of a validated, MySurgeryRisk computational algorithm for real-time predictive analytics with data derived from the electronic health records to augment physicians’ decision-making is feasible and accepted by physicians. Early involvement of physicians as key stakeholders in both design and implementation of this technology will be crucial for its future success.

Little is reported in the literature on management strategies and outcomes in patients with an active cancer diagnosis who undergo emergent general surgery. The purpose of this study is to evaluate preoperative risk factors in both operative and non-operative management, as well as to describe the outcomes of colonic emergencies within a cancer patient population.A single institution cancer database was reviewed retrospectively to identify patients with an active cancer diagnosis who had an emergency general surgery consult placed for an acute colonic pathology.A total of 87 patients were included. Among these, 38 patients underwent operative and 49 underwent nonoperative management. There was a 71% rate of postoperative complications in the operative group; these patients were also more likely to require intensive care unit admission (P.001), die during their hospitalization (P = .003), have a greater 30-day mortality (P = .001) and were less likely to be discharged to home (P.001). No patients in the nonoperative group required admission to the intensive care unit, 3 of the 49 (6%) died during their hospitalization, and 75% of nonoperative patients were discharged to home.When clinically appropriate, patients with active cancer who present with an acute colonic emergency can undergo nonoperative management safely. In contrast, patients undergoing operative management have a substantial risk of morbidity and mortality.

Patients who undergo Hartmann's procedure often do not have their colostomy closed based on the perceived risk of the operation. This study evaluated the outcome of reversal of Hartmann's procedure based on preoperative risk factors.We retrospectively reviewed adult patients who underwent reversal of Hartmann's procedure at our tertiary referral institution. Patient outcomes were compared based on identified risk factors (age60 years, American Society of Anesthesiologists [ASA] score2, and2 preoperative comorbidities).One-hundred thirteen patients were included. Forty-four patients (39%) had an ASA score ofor=3. The mean hospital duration of stay was 6.8 days. There were 28 (25%) postoperative complications and no mortality. Patients60 years old had significantly longer LOS compared with the rest of the group (P = .02). There were no differences in outcomes between groups based on ASA score or the presence of multiple preoperative comorbidities. An albumin level of3.5 was the only significant predictor of postoperative complications (P = .04).The reversal of Hartmann's operation appears to be a safe operation with acceptable morbidity rates and can be considered in patients, including those with significant operative risk factors.

Background. The purpose of this study was to compare the long-term results of Dacron and polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) aortic bifurcation grafts in a prospective randomized manner. Methods. Sixty patients with aortoiliac occlusive disease were randomized to receive Dacron or PTFE bifurcation grafts. Preoperative risk factors, perioperative blood loss and fluid requirements, and postoperative complications were compared. A mean follow-up of 57 months was achieved. Results. The immediate postoperative morbidity and mortality rates were similar in the two groups, and the long-term complications were low in number and comparable. The cumulative patency rate for Dacron graft limbs was 86% versus 95% for PTFE graft limbs. Conclusions. No significant differences were noted between the results achieved with Dacron and PTFE aortic bifurcation grafts.

Minimally invasive techniques and even robotics in pancreaticobiliary surgery are being used increasingly. Cost-effectiveness is a practical burden associated with the introduction of surgical innovation. This study compares the costs and the outcomes of open, laparoscopic, and robotic distal pancreatectomies. We hypothesized that robotic distal pancreatectomy is cost-effective.Between August 2008 and August 2009, 77 distal pancreatectomies were performed at a single academic medical center. A retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data on demographics, short-term outcomes, and direct cost was performed.Thirty-two open distal pancreatectomies, 28 laparoscopic distal pancreatectomies, and 17 robotic distal pancreatectomies were performed. Age, American Society of Anesthesia preoperative risk score, and specimen length were similar. Indications for laparoscopic distal pancreatectomies and robotic distal pancreatectomies included more cystic neoplasms (49%) and fewer malignancies (29%) versus open distal pancreatectomies (16% and 47%). Spleen preservation occurred in 65% robotic distal pancreatectomies versus 12% and 29% in open distal pancreatectomies and laparoscopic distal pancreatectomies (P.05). The operative time averaged 298 minutes in robotic distal pancreatectomies versus 245 and 222 minutes in open distal pancreatectomies and laparoscopic distal pancreatectomies (P .05). Blood loss and morbidity were similar with no mortality. The length of stay was 4 days in robotic distal pancreatectomies versus 8 and 6 in open distal pancreatectomies and laparoscopic distal pancreatectomies (P.05). The total cost was $10,588 in robotic distal pancreatectomies versus $16,059 and $12,986 in open distal pancreatectomies and laparoscopic distal pancreatectomies.These data suggest direct hospital costs are comparable among all groups. They suggest a shorter length of stay in robotic versus laparoscopic or open approaches. Finally, spleen and vessel preservation rates may improve with a robotic approach at the expense of increased operative time. In summary, robotic distal pancreatectomy is safe and cost effective in selected cases.