Development and evaluation of a list of high-risk inpatient procedures in patients 65 years and older

BACKGROUND

Inpatient procedures are common and important health events for older Americans. To facilitate surgical outcomes research, we sought to create and evaluate lists of International Classification of Disease, Tenth Revision (ICD-10) codes for high-risk inpatient procedures, defined as having at least a 1% inpatient mortality.

METHODS

This retrospective national cohort study analyzes Medicare claims from 2018 for patients 65 years and older undergoing inpatient procedures. Surgical Diagnosis Related Group (DRG) codes in the inpatient claims were used to identify procedures. We identified the primary ICD-10 procedure code for each patient and then compiled all codes with at least a 1% inpatient mortality yielding three separate lists: one list that was blind to elective versus urgent/emergent status, and one each for urgent/emergent and elective procedures. Clinical review by three surgeons was used to remove procedures unlikely to be the proximate cause of mortality. For evaluation, we examined the mortality of each code among fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries in 2017, 2019, and 2020 to determine how many of these satisfied the 1% mortality criterion.

RESULTS

This study included 2,241,419 patients from 2018 undergoing inpatient procedures. The final result included 231 (blind to elective vs urgent/emergent status), 167 (urgent/emergent status), and 119 (elective status) ICD-10 procedure codes for the three lists. Our evaluation from 2017, 2019, and 2020 demonstrated that in our master list, which was blind to elective versus urgent/emergent status, 97.8% of procedures had an inpatient mortality of at least 1%. In our high-risk procedures lists for urgent/emergent and elective procedures, 100% and 94.1% of codes met this requirement.

CONCLUSIONS

We developed and evaluated lists of ICD-10 codes representing high-risk procedures in patients 65 years and older. These lists will be powerful tools for researchers studying surgical outcomes.

Procedural precautions and personal protective equipment during head and neck instrumentation in the COVID-19 era

Background

Otolaryngologists represent a subset of health care workers uniquely vulnerable to COVID‐19 transmission. Given the segmentation of extant guidelines concerning precautions and protective equipment for SARS‐CoV2, we aimed to provide consolidated recommendations regarding appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE) in head neck surgery during the COVID‐19 era.

Methods

Guidelines published by international and US governing bodies were reviewed in conjunction with published literature concerning COVID‐19 transmission risk, testing, and PPE, to compile situation‐specific recommendations for head and neck providers managing COVID‐19 patients.

Results

High‐quality data regarding the aerosolization potential of head and neck instrumentation and appropriate PPE during head and neck surgeries are lacking. However, extrapolation of recommendations by governing bodies suggests strongly that head and neck mucosal instrumentation warrants strict adherence to airborne‐level precautions.

Conclusion

We present a series of situation‐specific recommendations for PPE use and other procedural precautions for otolaryngology providers to consider in the COVID‐19 era.

Postoperative Morbidity by Procedure and Patient Factors Influencing Major Complications Within 30 Days Following Shoulder Surgery

BACKGROUND

Little data are available to prioritize quality improvement initiatives in shoulder surgery.

PURPOSE

To stratify the risk for 30-day postoperative morbidity in commonly performed surgical procedures about the shoulder completed in a hospital setting and to determine patient factors associated with major complications.

STUDY DESIGN

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.

METHODS

This retrospective study utilized the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database from the years 2005 to 2010. Using Current Procedural Terminology codes, the database was queried for shoulder cases that were divided into 7 groups: arthroscopy without repair; arthroscopy with repair; arthroplasty; clavicle/acromioclavicular joint (AC) open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF)/repair; ORIF of proximal humeral fracture; open tendon release/repair; and open shoulder stabilization. The primary end point was any major complication, with secondary end points of incisional infection, return to the operating room, and venothromboembolism (VTE), all within 30 days of surgery.

RESULTS

Overall, 11,086 cases were analyzed. The overall major complication rate was 2.1% (n = 234). Factors associated with major complications on multivariate analysis included: procedure performed (P < .001), emergency case (P < .001), pulmonary comorbidity (P < .001), preoperative blood transfusion (P = .033), transfer from an outside institution (P = .03), American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score (P = .006), wound class (P < .001), dependent functional status (P = .027), and age older than 60 years (P = .01). After risk adjustment, open shoulder stabilization was associated with the greatest risk of major complications relative to arthroscopy without repair (odds ratio [OR], 5.56; P = .001), followed by ORIF of proximal humerus fracture (OR, 4.90; P < .001) and arthroplasty (OR, 4.40; P < .001). These 3 groups generated over 60% of all major complications. Open shoulder stabilization had the highest odds of reoperation (OR, 8.34; P < .001), while ORIF of proximal humerus fracture had the highest risk for VTE (OR, 6.47; P = .001) compared with the reference group of arthroscopy without repair.

CONCLUSION

Multivariable analysis of the NSQIP database suggests that open shoulder stabilization, ORIF for proximal humerus fractures, and shoulder arthroplasty are associated with the highest risk of major complications within 30 days after shoulder surgery in a hospital setting. Age, functional status, ASA score, pulmonary comorbidity, emergency case, preoperative blood transfusion, and transfer from an outside institution are patient variables that significantly influence complication risk.