Esmaeel Reza Dadashzadeh1, Patrick Bou-Samra2, Lauren V Huckaby3, Giacomo Nebbia4, Robert M Handzel3, Patrick R Varley3, Shandong Wu4, Allan Tsung5. 1. Department of Surgery, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. Electronic address: dadashzadeher@upmc.edu. 2. Department of Surgery, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. Electronic address: patrick.bousamra@jhmi.edu. 3. Department of Surgery, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. 4. Department of Biomedical Informatics, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania; Department of Biomedical Informatics, Intelligent Systems Program, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. 5. Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, The Ohio State University Medical Center, Columbus, Ohio. Electronic address: allan.tsung@osumc.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Surgical risk calculators (SRCs) have been developed for estimation of postoperative complications but do not directly inform decision-making. Decision curve analysis (DCA) is a method for evaluating prediction models, measuring their utility in guiding decisions. We aimed to analyze the utility of SRCs to guide both preoperative and postoperative management of patients undergoing hepatopancreaticobiliary surgery by using DCA. METHODS: A single-institution, retrospective review of patients undergoing hepatopancreaticobiliary operations between 2015 and 2017 was performed. Estimation of postoperative complications was conducted using the American College of Surgeons SRC [ACS-SRC] and the Predictive OpTimal Trees in Emergency Surgery Risk (POTTER) calculator; risks were compared with observed outcomes. DCA was used to model optimal patient selection for risk prevention strategies and to compare the relative performance of the ACS-SRC and POTTER calculators. RESULTS: A total of 994 patients were included in the analysis. C-statistics for the ACS-SRC prediction of 12 postoperative complications ranged from 0.546 to 0.782. DCA revealed that an ACS-SRC-guided readmission prevention intervention, when compared with an all-or-none approach, yielded a superior net benefit for patients with estimated risk between 5% and 20%. Comparison of SRCs for venous thromboembolism intervention demonstrated superiority of the ACS-SRC for thresholds for intervention between 2% and 4% with the POTTER calculator performing superiorly between 4% and 8% estimated risk. CONCLUSIONS: SRCs can be used not only to predict complication risk but also to guide risk prevention strategies. This methodology should be incorporated into external validations of future risk calculators and can be applied for institution-specific quality improvement initiatives to improve patient outcomes.
BACKGROUND: Surgical risk calculators (SRCs) have been developed for estimation of postoperative complications but do not directly inform decision-making. Decision curve analysis (DCA) is a method for evaluating prediction models, measuring their utility in guiding decisions. We aimed to analyze the utility of SRCs to guide both preoperative and postoperative management of patients undergoing hepatopancreaticobiliary surgery by using DCA. METHODS: A single-institution, retrospective review of patients undergoing hepatopancreaticobiliary operations between 2015 and 2017 was performed. Estimation of postoperative complications was conducted using the American College of Surgeons SRC [ACS-SRC] and the Predictive OpTimal Trees in Emergency Surgery Risk (POTTER) calculator; risks were compared with observed outcomes. DCA was used to model optimal patient selection for risk prevention strategies and to compare the relative performance of the ACS-SRC and POTTER calculators. RESULTS: A total of 994 patients were included in the analysis. C-statistics for the ACS-SRC prediction of 12 postoperative complications ranged from 0.546 to 0.782. DCA revealed that an ACS-SRC-guided readmission prevention intervention, when compared with an all-or-none approach, yielded a superior net benefit for patients with estimated risk between 5% and 20%. Comparison of SRCs for venous thromboembolism intervention demonstrated superiority of the ACS-SRC for thresholds for intervention between 2% and 4% with the POTTER calculator performing superiorly between 4% and 8% estimated risk. CONCLUSIONS: SRCs can be used not only to predict complication risk but also to guide risk prevention strategies. This methodology should be incorporated into external validations of future risk calculators and can be applied for institution-specific quality improvement initiatives to improve patient outcomes.
Authors: Nancy E Mayo; Liane Feldman; Susan Scott; Gerald Zavorsky; Do Jun Kim; Patrick Charlebois; Barry Stein; Francesco Carli Journal: Surgery Date: 2011-09 Impact factor: 3.982
Authors: Eliza W Beal; Ezra Lyon; Joe Kearney; Lai Wei; Cecilia G Ethun; Sylvester M Black; Mary Dillhoff; Ahmed Salem; Sharon M Weber; Thuy B Tran; George Poultsides; Rivfka Shenoy; Ioannis Hatzaras; Bradley Krasnick; Ryan C Fields; Stefan Buttner; Charles R Scoggins; Robert C G Martin; Chelsea A Isom; Kamron Idrees; Harveshp D Mogal; Perry Shen; Shishir K Maithel; Timothy M Pawlik; Carl R Schmidt Journal: HPB (Oxford) Date: 2017-09-07 Impact factor: 3.647
Authors: Vivian Hsiao; Dawn M Elfenbein; Susan C Pitt; Kristin L Long; Rebecca S Sippel; David F Schneider Journal: J Surg Res Date: 2021-12-10 Impact factor: 2.192