Long-term risk prediction after major lower limb amputation: 1-year results of the PERCEIVE study

BACKGROUND

Decision-making when considering major lower limb amputation is complex and requires individualized outcome estimation. It is unknown how accurate healthcare professionals or relevant outcome prediction tools are at predicting outcomes at 1-year after major lower limb amputation.

METHODS

An international, multicentre prospective observational study evaluating healthcare professional accuracy in predicting outcomes 1 year after major lower limb amputation and evaluation of relevant outcome prediction tools identified in a systematic search of the literature was undertaken. Observed outcomes at 1 year were compared with: healthcare professionals' preoperative predictions of death (surgeons and anaesthetists), major lower limb amputation revision (surgeons) and ambulation (surgeons, specialist physiotherapists and vascular nurse practitioners); and probabilities calculated from relevant outcome prediction tools.

RESULTS

A total of 537 patients and 2244 healthcare professional predictions of outcomes were included. Surgeons and anaesthetists had acceptable discrimination (C-statistic = 0.715), calibration and overall performance (Brier score = 0.200) when predicting 1-year death, but performed worse when predicting major lower limb amputation revision and ambulation (C-statistics = 0.627 and 0.662 respectively). Healthcare professionals overestimated the death and major lower limb amputation revision risks. Consultants outperformed trainees, especially when predicting ambulation. Allied healthcare professionals marginally outperformed surgeons in predicting ambulation. Two outcome prediction tools (C-statistics = 0.755 and 0.717, Brier scores = 0.158 and 0.178) outperformed healthcare professionals' discrimination, calibration and overall performance in predicting death. Two outcome prediction tools for ambulation (C-statistics = 0.688 and 0.667) marginally outperformed healthcare professionals.

CONCLUSION

There is uncertainty in predicting 1-year outcomes following major lower limb amputation. Different professional groups performed comparably in this study. Two outcome prediction tools for death and two for ambulation outperformed healthcare professionals and may support shared decision-making.

PRESS survey: PREvention of surgical site infection-a global pan-specialty survey of practice protocol

Background

Surgical site infections (SSI) complicate up to 40% of surgical procedures, leading to increased patient morbidity and mortality. Previous research identified disparities in SSI prevention guidelines and clinical practices across different institutions. The study aims to identify variations in SSI prevention practices within and between specialties and financial systems and provide a representation of existing SSI preventative measures to help improve the standardization of SSI prevention practices.

Methods

This collaborative cross-sectional survey will be aimed at pan-surgical specialties internationally. The study has been designed and will be reported in line with the CROSS and CHERRIES standards. An international study steering committee will design and internally validate the survey in multiple consensus-based rounds. This will be based on SSI prevention measures outlined in the CDC (2017), WHO (2018), NICE (2019), Wounds UK (2020) and the International Surgical Wound Complications Advisory Panel (ISWCAP) guidelines. The questionnaire will include demographics, SSI surveillance, preoperative, peri-operative and postoperative SSI prevention. Data will be collected on participants' surgical specialty, operative grade, of practice and financial healthcare system of practice. The online survey will be designed and disseminated using QualtricsXM Platform™ through national and international surgical colleges and societies, in addition to social media and snowballing. Data collection will be open for 3 months with reminders, and raking will be used to ascertain the sample. Responses will be analyzed, and the chi-square test used to evaluate the impact of SSI prevention variables on responses.

Discussion

Current SSI prevention practice in UK Vascular surgery varies considerably, with little consensus on many measures. Given the inconsistency in guidelines on how to prevent SSIs, there is a need for standardization. This survey will investigate the disparity in SSI preventative measures between different surgical fields and countries.

Systematic review of groin wound surgical site infection incidence after arterial intervention

The objectives were to determine the surgical site infection incidence (including superficial/deep) fter arterial intervention through non-infected groin incisions and identify variables associated with incidence. MEDLINE, EMBASE and CENTRAL databases were searched for randomised controlled trials and observational studies of adults undergoing arterial intervention through a groin incision and reported surgical site infection. Infection incidence was examined in subgroups, variables were subjected to meta-regression. One hundred seventeen studies reporting 65 138 groin incisions in 42 347 patients were included. Overall surgical site infection incidence per incision was 8.1% (1730/21 431): 6.3% (804/12 786) were superficial and 1.9% (241/12 863) were deep. Superficial infection incidence was higher in randomised controlled trials (15.8% [278/1762]) compared with observational studies (4.8% [526/11 024]); deep infection incidence was similar (1.7% (30/1762) and 1.9% (211/11 101) respectively). Aneurysmal pathology (β = -10.229, P < .001) and retrospective observational design (β = -1.118, P = .002) were associated with lower infection incidence. Surgical site infection being a primary outcome was associated with a higher incidence of surgical site infections (β = 3.429, P = .017). The three-fold higher incidence of superficial surgical site infection reported in randomised controlled trials may be because of a more robust clinical review of patients. These results should be considered when benchmarking practice and could inform future trial design.