Literature DB >> 1598671

Proposed classification of complications of surgery with examples of utility in cholecystectomy.

P A Clavien1, J R Sanabria, S M Strasberg.   

Abstract

Lack of uniform reporting of negative outcomes makes interpretation of surgical literature difficult. We attempt to define and classify negative outcomes by differentiating complications, sequelae, and failures. Complications and sequelae result from procedures, adding new problems to the underlying disease. However, complications are unexpected events not intrinsic to the procedure, whereas sequelae are inherent to the procedure. Failures are events in which the purpose of the procedure is not fulfilled. We propose a classification of complications based on four grades: Grade I complications are alterations from the ideal postoperative course, non-life-threatening, and with no lasting disability. Complications of this grade necessitate only bedside procedures and do not significantly extend hospital stay. Grade II complications are potentially life-threatening but without residual disability. Within grade II complications a subdivision is made according to the requirement for invasive procedures. Grade III complications are those with residual disability, including organ resection or persistence of life-threatening conditions. Finally, grade IV complications are deaths as a result of complications. To illustrate the relevance of the classification, we reviewed 650 cases of elective cholecystectomy. Risk factors for development of complications were determined, and the classification was also used to analyze the value of a modified APACHE II as a preoperative prognostic score. Both supported the relevance of the proposed classification. The advantages of such a classification are (1) increased uniformity in reporting results, (2) the ability to compare results of two distinct time periods in a single center, (3) the ability to compare results of surgery between different centers, (4) the ability to compare results of surgical versus nonsurgical measures, (5) the ability to perform adequate metaanalysis, (6) the ability to identify objective preoperative risk factors, and (7) the ability to establish preoperative prognostic scores.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1992        PMID: 1598671

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Surgery        ISSN: 0039-6060            Impact factor:   3.982


  417 in total

1.  Anatomic fundoplication failure after laparoscopic antireflux surgery.

Authors:  N J Soper; D Dunnegan
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  1999-05       Impact factor: 12.969

2.  Laparoscopic cholecystectomy versus mini-laparotomy cholecystectomy: a prospective, randomized, single-blind study.

Authors:  A Ros; L Gustafsson; H Krook; C E Nordgren; A Thorell; G Wallin; E Nilsson
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2001-12       Impact factor: 12.969

3.  [Robot-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty in adults: Excellent long-term results of primary pyeloplasty].

Authors:  M Traumann; L A Kluth; M Schmid; C Meyer; B Schwaiger; C Rosenbaum; P Schriefer; M Fisch; R Dahlem; D Seiler; S Ahyai; A Haese; F K-H Chun
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2015-05       Impact factor: 0.639

4.  Clinical outcomes after laparoscopic antireflux surgery in patients with and without preoperative endoscopic esophagitis.

Authors:  Ketan M Desai; Margaret M Frisella; Nathaniel J Soper
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2003-01       Impact factor: 3.452

5.  Laparoscopic Gynae-oncological Procedures: Lessons Learnt After a Single Institution Audit of Complications and Their Management in 567 Consecutive Patients.

Authors:  Shailesh P Puntambekar; Geetanjali A Agrawal; Saurabh N Joshi; Neeraj V Rayate; D N B Saravana; Avanish V Deshmukh
Journal:  J Obstet Gynaecol India       Date:  2013-08-13

6.  Single-incision vs three-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy for complicated and uncomplicated acute cholecystitis.

Authors:  Shu-Hung Chuang; Pai-Hsi Chen; Chih-Ming Chang; Chih-Sheng Lin
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2013-11-21       Impact factor: 5.742

7.  Surgeons are overlooking post-discharge complications: a prospective cohort study.

Authors:  A Visser; D T Ubbink; D J Gouma; J C Goslings
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2014-05       Impact factor: 3.352

8.  Gallstone cholangitis: a 10-year experience of combined endoscopic and laparoscopic treatment.

Authors:  L Sarli; D Iusco; G Sgobba; L Roncoroni
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2002-03-05       Impact factor: 4.584

9.  Neoadjuvant radiation and chemotherapy in rectal cancer does not increase postoperative complications.

Authors:  G Valero; J A Luján; Q Hernández; M De Las Heras; E Pellicer; A Serrano; P Parrilla
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2003-07-15       Impact factor: 2.571

10.  Risk factors and complications in hip reconstruction for nonambulatory patients with cerebral palsy.

Authors:  Joseph J Ruzbarsky; Nicholas A Beck; Keith D Baldwin; Wudbhav N Sankar; John M Flynn; David A Spiegel
Journal:  J Child Orthop       Date:  2013-10-15       Impact factor: 1.548

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.