Literature DB >> 18650644

Does the Surgical Apgar Score measure intraoperative performance?

Scott E Regenbogen1, R Todd Lancaster, Stuart R Lipsitz, Caprice C Greenberg, Matthew M Hutter, Atul A Gawande.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether Surgical Apgar Scores measure the relationship between intraoperative care and surgical outcomes. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: With preoperative risk-adjustment now well-developed, the role of intraoperative performance in surgical outcomes may be considered. We previously derived and validated a 10-point Surgical Apgar Score--based on intraoperative blood loss, heart rate, and blood pressure--that effectively predicts major postoperative complications within 30 days of general and vascular surgery. This study evaluates whether the predictive value of this score comes solely from patients' preoperative risk or also measures care in the operating room.
METHODS: Among a systematic sample of 4119 general and vascular surgery patients at a major academic hospital, we constructed a detailed risk-prediction model including 27 patient-comorbidity and procedure-complexity variables, and computed patients' propensity to suffer a major postoperative complication. We evaluated the prognostic value of patients' Surgical Apgar Scores before and after adjustment for this preoperative risk.
RESULTS: After risk-adjustment, the Surgical Apgar Score remained strongly correlated with postoperative outcomes (P < 0.0001). Odds of major complications among average-scoring patients (scores 7-8) were equivalent to preoperative predictions (likelihood ratio (LR) 1.05, 95% CI 0.78-1.41), significantly decreased for those who achieved the best scores of 9-10 (LR 0.52, 95% CI 0.35-0.78), and were significantly poorer for those with low scores--LRs 1.60 (1.12-2.28) for scores 5-6, and 2.80 (1.50-5.21) for scores 0-4.
CONCLUSIONS: Even after accounting for fixed preoperative risk--due to patients' acute condition, comorbidities and/or operative complexity--the Surgical Apgar Score appears to detect differences in intraoperative management that reduce odds of major complications by half or increase them by nearly 3-fold.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18650644      PMCID: PMC2562699          DOI: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e318181c6b1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Surg        ISSN: 0003-4932            Impact factor:   12.969


  54 in total

1.  Postoperative renal dysfunction can be predicted.

Authors:  M E Charlson; C R MacKenzie; J P Gold; K L Ales; G T Shires
Journal:  Surg Gynecol Obstet       Date:  1989-10

2.  Risks of general anesthesia and elective operation in the hypertensive patient.

Authors:  L Goldman; D L Caldera
Journal:  Anesthesiology       Date:  1979-04       Impact factor: 7.892

3.  Myocardial infarction during and following anesthesia and operation.

Authors:  J E Plumlee; R B Boettner
Journal:  South Med J       Date:  1972-07       Impact factor: 0.954

4.  A method of comparing the areas under receiver operating characteristic curves derived from the same cases.

Authors:  J A Hanley; B J McNeil
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1983-09       Impact factor: 11.105

5.  The meaning and use of the area under a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve.

Authors:  J A Hanley; B J McNeil
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1982-04       Impact factor: 11.105

6.  The preoperative and intraoperative hemodynamic predictors of postoperative myocardial infarction or ischemia in patients undergoing noncardiac surgery.

Authors:  M E Charlson; C R MacKenzie; J P Gold; K L Ales; M Topkins; G P Fairclough; G T Shires
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  1989-11       Impact factor: 12.969

7.  Postoperative myocardial infarction: a prospective study in a risk group of surgical patients.

Authors:  J von Knorring
Journal:  Surgery       Date:  1981-07       Impact factor: 3.982

8.  Hemodynamic predictors of myocardial ischemia during halothane anesthesia for coronary-artery revascularization.

Authors:  R W Lieberman; F K Orkin; D R Jobes; A J Schwartz
Journal:  Anesthesiology       Date:  1983-07       Impact factor: 7.892

9.  Reinfarction following anesthesia in patients with myocardial infarction.

Authors:  T L Rao; K H Jacobs; A A El-Etr
Journal:  Anesthesiology       Date:  1983-12       Impact factor: 7.892

10.  Clinical predictors of intraoperative myocardial ischemia in patients with coronary artery disease undergoing non-cardiac surgery.

Authors:  P Coriat; A Harari; M Daloz; P Viars
Journal:  Acta Anaesthesiol Scand       Date:  1982-08       Impact factor: 2.105

View more
  19 in total

1.  Utility of the Surgical Apgar Score in a district general hospital.

Authors:  Christopher C Thorn; Melanie Chan; Nihal Sinha; Richard A Harrison
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2012-05       Impact factor: 3.352

2.  A composite index for predicting readmission following emergency general surgery.

Authors:  Gajanthan Muthuvel; Sarah E Tevis; Amy E Liepert; Suresh K Agarwal; Gregory D Kennedy
Journal:  J Trauma Acute Care Surg       Date:  2014-06       Impact factor: 3.313

3.  Basic Features and Clinical Applicability of 'Preliminary Universal Surgical Invasiveness Score' (pUSIS): A Multi-Centre Pilot Study.

Authors:  Peter Biro; Luc Sermeus; Radmilo Jankovic; Nenad Savić; Adela Hilda Onuţu; Daniela Ionescu; Daniela Godoroja; Gabriel Gurman
Journal:  Turk J Anaesthesiol Reanim       Date:  2017-02-01

Review 4.  Optimal Perioperative Blood Pressure Management.

Authors:  Senthil Packiasabapathy K; Balachundhar Subramaniam
Journal:  Adv Anesth       Date:  2018-09-24

5.  A low surgical Apgar score is a predictor of anastomotic leakage after transthoracic esophagectomy, but not a prognostic factor.

Authors:  Masato Hayashi; Hirofumi Kawakubo; Shuhei Mayanagi; Rieko Nakamura; Koichi Suda; Norihito Wada; Yuko Kitagawa
Journal:  Esophagus       Date:  2019-06-05       Impact factor: 4.230

6.  The Surgical Apgar Score in hip and knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  Thomas H Wuerz; Scott E Regenbogen; Jesse M Ehrenfeld; Henrik Malchau; Harry E Rubash; Atul A Gawande; David M Kent
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2010-12-04       Impact factor: 4.176

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

Authors:  Scott E Regenbogen; Liliana Bordeianou; Matthew M Hutter; Atul A Gawande
Journal:  Surgery       Date:  2010-03-12       Impact factor: 3.982

8.  Impact of operative time and surgeon satisfaction on the long-term outcome of hernia repair.

Authors:  G Sandblom; D Sevonius; C Staël von Holstein
Journal:  Hernia       Date:  2009-12       Impact factor: 4.739

9.  Use of the surgical Apgar score to guide postoperative care.

Authors:  J B Haddow; H Adwan; S E Clark; S Tayeh; S S Antonowicz; P Jayia; D W Chicken; T Wiggins; R Davenport; S Kaptanis; M Fakhry; C H Knowles; A S Elmetwally; E Geddoa; M S Nair; I Naeem; S Adegbola; L J Muirhead
Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl       Date:  2014-07       Impact factor: 1.891

10.  How to improve the performance of intraoperative risk models: an example with vital signs using the surgical apgar score.

Authors:  Joseph A Hyder; Daryl J Kor; Robert R Cima; Arun Subramanian
Journal:  Anesth Analg       Date:  2013-12       Impact factor: 5.108

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.