BACKGROUND: Reoperation has been increasingly utilized as a metric evaluating quality of care. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the rate of, reasons for, and predictors of unplanned reoperation after craniotomy for tumor in a nationally accrued population. METHODS: Patients who underwent cranial tumor resection were extracted from the prospective National Surgical Quality Improvement Program registry (2012-2014). Multivariate logistic regression examined predictors of unplanned cranial reoperation. Predictors screened included patient age, sex, tumor location and histology, functional status, comorbidities, preoperative laboratory values, operative urgency, and time. RESULTS: Of the 11 462 patients included, 3.1% (n = 350) underwent an unplanned cranial reoperation. The most common reasons for cranial reoperation were intracranial hematoma evacuation (22.5%), superficial or intracranial surgical site infections (11.9%), re-resection of tumor (8.4%), decompressive craniectomy (6.1%), and repair of cerebrospinal fluid leakage (5.6%). The strongest predictor of any cranial reoperation was preoperative thrombocytopenia (less than 100 000/μL, odds ratio [OR] = 2.51, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.23-5.10, P = .01). Thrombocytopenia, hypertension, emergent surgery, and longer operative time were predictors of reoperation for hematoma (P ≤ .004), while dependent functional status, morbid obesity, leukocytosis, and longer operative time were predictors of reoperation for infection (P < .05). Although any unplanned cranial reoperation was not associated with differential odds of mortality (OR = 1.68, 95% CI: 0.94-3.00, P = .08), hematoma evacuation was significantly associated with thirty-day death (P = .04). CONCLUSION: In this national analysis, unplanned cranial reoperation was primarily associated with operative indices, rather than preoperative characteristics, suggesting that reoperation may have some utility as a quality indicator. However, hypertension and thrombocytopenia were potentially modifiable predictors of reoperation.
BACKGROUND: Reoperation has been increasingly utilized as a metric evaluating quality of care. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the rate of, reasons for, and predictors of unplanned reoperation after craniotomy for tumor in a nationally accrued population. METHODS:Patients who underwent cranial tumor resection were extracted from the prospective National Surgical Quality Improvement Program registry (2012-2014). Multivariate logistic regression examined predictors of unplanned cranial reoperation. Predictors screened included patient age, sex, tumor location and histology, functional status, comorbidities, preoperative laboratory values, operative urgency, and time. RESULTS: Of the 11 462 patients included, 3.1% (n = 350) underwent an unplanned cranial reoperation. The most common reasons for cranial reoperation were intracranial hematoma evacuation (22.5%), superficial or intracranial surgical site infections (11.9%), re-resection of tumor (8.4%), decompressive craniectomy (6.1%), and repair of cerebrospinal fluid leakage (5.6%). The strongest predictor of any cranial reoperation was preoperative thrombocytopenia (less than 100 000/μL, odds ratio [OR] = 2.51, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.23-5.10, P = .01). Thrombocytopenia, hypertension, emergent surgery, and longer operative time were predictors of reoperation for hematoma (P ≤ .004), while dependent functional status, morbid obesity, leukocytosis, and longer operative time were predictors of reoperation for infection (P < .05). Although any unplanned cranial reoperation was not associated with differential odds of mortality (OR = 1.68, 95% CI: 0.94-3.00, P = .08), hematoma evacuation was significantly associated with thirty-day death (P = .04). CONCLUSION: In this national analysis, unplanned cranial reoperation was primarily associated with operative indices, rather than preoperative characteristics, suggesting that reoperation may have some utility as a quality indicator. However, hypertension and thrombocytopenia were potentially modifiable predictors of reoperation.
Authors: Neel R Sangal; Kalin Nishimori; Eric Zhao; Sana H Siddiqui; Soly Baredes; Richard Chan Woo Park Journal: JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg Date: 2018-11-01 Impact factor: 6.223
Authors: Birgit Coucke; Laura Van Gerven; Steven De Vleeschouwer; Frank Van Calenbergh; Johannes van Loon; Tom Theys Journal: Neurosurg Rev Date: 2021-09-09 Impact factor: 3.042
Authors: Christiane Menke; Sebastian Lohmann; Andrea Baehr; Oliver Grauer; Markus Holling; Benjamin Brokinkel; Michael Schwake; Walter Stummer; Stephanie Schipmann Journal: Neurooncol Pract Date: 2021-10-11
Authors: Muhammad Faraz Raghib; Muhammad Usman Khalid; Noor Malik; Mir Ibrahim Sajid; Umm E Hani Abdullah; Asra Tanwir; Syed Ather Enam Journal: Cureus Date: 2022-01-20
Authors: Alies J Dekkers; Friso de Vries; Amir H Zamanipoor Najafabadi; Emmy M van der Hoeven; Marco J T Verstegen; Alberto M Pereira; Wouter R van Furth; Nienke R Biermasz Journal: Front Endocrinol (Lausanne) Date: 2022-07-07 Impact factor: 6.055