Estimation of physiologic ability and surgical stress (E-PASS) for a surgical audit in elective digestive surgery

A review of risk scoring systems utilised in patients undergoing gastrointestinal surgery

INTRODUCTION

Adequate stratification and scoring of risk is essential to optimise clinical practice; the ability to predict operative mortality and morbidity is important. This review aims to outline the essential elements of available risk scoring systems in patients undergoing gastrointestinal surgery and their differences in order to enable effective utilisation.

METHODS

The English literature was searched over the last 50 years to provide an overview of systems pertaining to the adult surgical patient.

DISCUSSION

Scoring systems can provide objectivity and mortality prediction enabling communication and understanding of severity of illness. Incorporating subjective factors within scoring systems can allow clinicians to apply their experience and understanding of the situation to an individual but are not reproducible. Limitations relating to obtaining variables, calculating predicted mortality and applicability were present in most systems. Over time scoring systems have become out-dated which may reflect continuing improvement in care. APACHE II shows the importance of reproducibility and comparability particularly when assessing critically ill patients. Both NSQIP in the USA and P-POSSUM in the UK seem to have many benefits which derive from their comprehensive dataset. The "Surgical Apgar" score offers relatively objective criteria which contrasts against the subjective nature of the ASA score.

CONCLUSION

P-POSSUM and NSQIP are comprehensive but are difficult to calculate. In the search for a simple and easy to calculate score, the "Surgical Apgar" score may be a potential answer. However, more studies need to be performed before it becomes as widely taken up as APACHE II, NSQIP and P-POSSUM.

Is an estimation of physiologic ability and surgical stress able to predict operative morbidity after pancreaticoduodenectomy?

BACKGROUND

Mortality rates after pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) are below 4% in high volume centers, although morbidity rates still remain high. Therefore, it is important to clarify a predictor associated with operative morbidity after PD. The estimation of physiologic ability and surgical stress (E-PASS) score has been developed for comparative audit in general surgical patients.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate whether E-PASS scoring system could predict the occurrence of complications after PD.

METHODS

We performed retrospective analysis of 69 patients (42.0% pancreatic cancer, 31.9% bile duct cancer, and others) who underwent PD using the E-PASS as a predictor of morbidity. Correlations between the incidence rates of postoperative complications and the preoperative risk score (PRS), surgical stress score (SSS) and comprehensive risk score (CRS) of the E-PASS scoring system were evaluated.

RESULTS

Of the 69 patients 30 (43.5%) experienced a total of 54 postoperative complications. All E-PASS scores, especially PRS and CRS were significantly higher in the patients with postoperative complications than in the patients without complication. The complication rate gradually increased as the PRS, SSS and CRS score increased. Under receiver operating characteristic analysis, if a cut-off point of CRS was 0.75, sensitivity and specificity for the prediction of operative morbidity after PD was 80.0 and 79.5%, respectively. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy and intraoperative radiation therapy (IORT) did not influenced on operative morbidity after PD.

CONCLUSION

E-PASS scoring system is useful to evaluate for morbidity after PD. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy and IORT could be adapted without significant extra risk for surgical complication.

Estimation of physiologic ability and surgical stress (E-PASS) as a predictor of immediate outcome after elective abdominal aortic aneurysm surgery

BACKGROUND

The Estimation of Physiologic Ability and Surgical Stress (E-PASS) score was designed on the premise that the balance between the patient's physiologic reserve capacity and the surgical stress inflicted at operation was important in the occurrence of postoperative complications. The aim of this study was to assess its value in predicting mortality and morbidity after open elective abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair.

METHODS

E-PASS data items were collected prospectively in a group of 204 patients undergoing elective open AAA repair over a 6-year period. The operative morbidity and mortality rates were compared with the preoperative risk score (PRS), surgical stress score (SSS) and comprehensive risk score (CRS) of E-PASS. The group comprised 180 (88%) males and the median age was 73 (range 44 to 86) years.

RESULTS

There were 13 (6%) deaths and 121 (59%) experienced a postoperative complication. As the PRS, SSS and CRS increased, the incidence of postoperative morbidity and mortality significantly increased (P < .0001). Overall mean CRS was .52 (+/-.27). Mean CRS in the groups of patients who survived and died were .49 (+/-.24) and .98 (+/-26), respectively. PRS, SSS, and CRS all had extremely good predictive power for both mortality and morbidity as demonstrated by high areas under the receiver operator curve (range .799 to .953). CRS also showed a strong statistically significant association with the severity of postoperative complication (P < .0001) and length of hospital stay (P < .0001).

CONCLUSIONS

The E-PASS model appears to be a promising method of predicting death and the development of postoperative complications in patients undergoing elective open AAA surgery. It requires further validation in arterial surgery at different geographical locations.

Sistema POSSUM. Un instrumento de medida de la calidad en el paciente quirúrgico

INTRODUCTION

The POSSUM scale (Physiological and Operative Severity Score for the enUmeration of Mortality and Morbidity) is a scoring system that is used to predict risk-adjusted mortality and morbidity rates in a wide variety of surgical procedures. In this prospective study, the validity of the POSSUM scale was evaluated in patients undergoing laparotomy in a general surgery department.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The POSSUM scale was prospectively applied in all patients undergoing elective and emergency laparotomy in the general surgery department of a level II hospital over 8 months. A total of 105 patients were included, of which 24 underwent emergency laparotomy and 81 underwent elective surgery. Predicted mortality and morbidity rates were calculated by using the POSSUM scale. These results were compared with actual outcomes by using Fisher's test.

RESULTS

The mean physiological score was 23.4 points (range: 12-40 points), while the mean surgical score was 11.3 points (range: 6-24 points). Three patients died during the postoperative period and 47 had morbidity. When the observed results for mortality were compared with those predicted by the POSSUM scoring system, no significant differences were observed in the analysis by risk groups, except in the risk group < 20 %, in which the POSSUM scale overestimated mortality. The risk of morbidity was underestimated by the POSSUM scale in the risk group < 20 %.

CONCLUSION

The POSSUM scoring system is a useful predictor of morbidity and mortality in patients undergoing emergency and elective laparotomy.