RSS-Feed abonnieren
DOI: 10.1055/s-0043-1760821
Classification of Adverse Events in Adult Surgery
![](https://www.thieme-connect.de/media/ejps/202302/lookinside/thumbnails/10-1055-s-0043-1760821_2022116412rev-1.jpg)
Abstract
Successful surgery combines quality (achievement of a positive outcome) with safety (avoidance of a negative outcome). Outcome assessment serves the purpose of quality improvement in health care by establishing performance indicators and allowing the identification of performance gaps. Novel surgical quality metric tools (benchmark cutoffs and textbook outcomes) provide procedure-specific ideal surgical outcomes in a subgroup of well-defined low-risk patients, with the aim of setting realistic and best achievable goals for surgeons and centers, as well as supporting unbiased comparison of surgical quality between centers and periods of time. Validated classification systems have been deployed to grade adverse events during the surgical journey: (1) the ClassIntra classification for the intraoperative period; (2) the Clavien–Dindo classification for the gravity of single adverse events; and the (3) Comprehensive Complication Index (CCI) for the sum of adverse events over a defined postoperative period. The failure to rescue rate refers to the death of a patient following one or more potentially treatable postoperative adverse event(s) and is a reliable proxy of the institutional safety culture and infrastructure. Complication assessment is undergoing digital transformation to decrease resource-intensity and provide surgeons with real-time pre- or intraoperative decision support. Standardized reporting of complications informs patients on their chances to realize favorable postoperative outcomes and assists surgical centers in the prioritization of quality improvement initiatives, multidisciplinary teamwork, surgical education, and ultimately, in the enhancement of clinical standards.
Publikationsverlauf
Eingereicht: 06. November 2022
Angenommen: 15. November 2022
Artikel online veröffentlicht:
31. Januar 2023
© 2023. Thieme. All rights reserved.
Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Rüdigerstraße 14, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany
-
References
- 1 Lee PHU, Gawande AA. The number of surgical procedures in an American lifetime in 3 states. J Am Coll Surg 2008; 207 (03) S75
- 2 Grocott MP, Pearse RM. Perioperative medicine: the future of anaesthesia?. Br J Anaesth 2012; 108 (05) 723-726
- 3 Adde HA, van Duinen AJ, Oghogho MD. et al. Impact of surgical infrastructure and personnel on volume and availability of essential surgical procedures in Liberia. BJS Open 2020; 4 (06) 1246-1255
- 4 Monteiro E, Seib C, Sosa JA. et al. Quality assessment in thyroid and parathyroid surgery. Surgery of the Thyroid and Parathyroid Glands 2021: 426-432
- 5 Antonsen S. The relationship between culture and safety on offshore supply vessels. Saf Sci 2009; 47 (08) 1118-1128
- 6 Aloia TA. Should zero harm be our goal?. Ann Surg 2020; 271 (01) 33-36
- 7 Murphy PJ. Measuring and recording outcome. Br J Anaesth 2012; 109 (01) 92-98
- 8 Hyer JM, Beane JD, Spolverato G. et al. Trends in textbook outcomes over time: are optimal outcomes following complex gastrointestinal surgery for cancer increasing?. J Gastrointest Surg 2022; 26 (01) 50-59
- 9 Bagante F, Ruzzenente A, Beal EW. et al. Complications after liver surgery: a benchmark analysis. HPB (Oxford) 2019; 21 (09) 1139-1149
- 10 Musella M, Berardi G, Velotti N, Schiavone V, Manetti C, Vitiello A. Safety and efficacy of OAGB/MGB during the learning curve: setting a benchmark in a bariatric center of excellence. Updates Surg 2022
- 11 Giudicelli G, Diana M, Chevallay M. et al. Global benchmark values for laparoscopic Roux-en-Y-gastric bypass: a potential new indicator of the surgical learning curve. Obes Surg 2021; 31 (02) 746-754
- 12 Gero D, Muller X, Staiger RD. et al. How to establish benchmarks for surgical outcomes?: a checklist based on an international expert Delphi consensus. Ann Surg 2022; 275 (01) 115-120
- 13 Staiger RD, Schwandt H, Puhan MA, Clavien PA. Improving surgical outcomes through benchmarking. Br J Surg 2019; 106 (01) 59-64
- 14 Cacciamani GE, Sholklapper T, Dell'Oglio P. et al; ICARUS Global Surgical Collaboration Working Group. The Intraoperative Complications Assessment and Reporting with Universal Standards (ICARUS) global surgical collaboration project: development of criteria for reporting adverse events during surgical procedures and evaluating their impact on the postoperative course. Eur Urol Focus 2022; S2405-4569 (22) 00039-6
- 15 Bihorac A, Ozrazgat-Baslanti T, Ebadi A. et al. MySurgeryRisk: development and validation of a machine-learning risk algorithm for major complications and death after surgery. Ann Surg 2019; 269 (04) 652-662
- 16 Allen-Duck A, Robinson JC, Stewart MW. Healthcare quality: a concept analysis. Nurs Forum 2017; 52 (04) 377-386
- 17 Kolfschoten NE, Kievit J, Gooiker GA. et al. Focusing on desired outcomes of care after colon cancer resections; hospital variations in ‘textbook outcome’. Eur J Surg Oncol 2013; 39 (02) 156-163
- 18 Coory M, Scott I. Analysing low-risk patient populations allows better discrimination between high-performing and low-performing hospitals: a case study using inhospital mortality from acute myocardial infarction. Qual Saf Health Care 2007; 16 (05) 324-328
- 19 Gero D, Vannijvel M, Okkema S. et al. Defining global benchmarks in elective secondary bariatric surgery comprising conversional, revisional, and reversal procedures. Ann Surg 2021; 274 (05) 821-828
- 20 Raptis DA, Sánchez-Velázquez P, Machairas N. et al. Defining benchmark outcomes for pancreatoduodenectomy with portomesenteric venous resection. Ann Surg 2020; 272 (05) 731-737
- 21 Gero D, Raptis DA, Vleeschouwers W. et al. Defining global benchmarks in bariatric surgery: a retrospective multicenter analysis of minimally invasive Roux-en-Y gastric bypass and sleeve gastrectomy. Ann Surg 2019; 270 (05) 859-867
- 22 Raptis DA, Linecker M, Kambakamba P. et al. Defining benchmark outcomes for ALPPS. Ann Surg 2019; 270 (05) 835-841
- 23 Sánchez-Velázquez P, Muller X, Malleo G. et al. Benchmarks in pancreatic surgery: a novel tool for unbiased outcome comparisons. Ann Surg 2019; 270 (02) 211-218
- 24 Muller X, Marcon F, Sapisochin G. et al. Defining benchmarks in liver transplantation: a multicenter outcome analysis determining best achievable results. Ann Surg 2018; 267 (03) 419-425
- 25 Schmidt HM, Gisbertz SS, Moons J. et al. Defining benchmarks for transthoracic esophagectomy: a multicenter analysis of total minimally invasive esophagectomy in low risk patients. Ann Surg 2017; 266 (05) 814-821
- 26 Rössler F, Sapisochin G, Song G. et al. Defining benchmarks for major liver surgery: a multicenter analysis of 5202 living liver donors. Ann Surg 2016; 264 (03) 492-500
- 27 Breuer E, Mueller M, Doyle MB. et al. Liver transplantation as a new standard of care in patients with perihilar cholangiocarcinoma? Results from an international benchmark study. Ann Surg 2022; 276 (05) 846-853
- 28 Müller PC, Breuer E, Nickel F. et al. Robotic distal pancreatectomy, a novel standard of care? Benchmark values for surgical outcomes from 16 international expert centers. Ann Surg 2022; DOI: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000005601.
- 29 Schlegel A, van Reeven M, Croome K. et al; DCD Collaborator Group. A multicentre outcome analysis to define global benchmarks for donation after circulatory death liver transplantation. J Hepatol 2022; 76 (02) 371-382
- 30 Mueller M, Breuer E, Mizuno T. et al. Perihilar cholangiocarcinoma - novel benchmark values for surgical and oncological outcomes from 24 expert centers. Ann Surg 2021; 274 (05) 780-788
- 31 Abbassi F, Gero D, Muller X. et al. Novel benchmark values for redo liver transplantation: does the outcome justify the effort?. Ann Surg 2022; 276 (05) 860-867
- 32 Staiger RD, Rössler F, Kim MJ. et al. Benchmarks in colorectal surgery: multinational study to define quality thresholds in high and low anterior resection. Br J Surg 2022; znac300
- 33 van Roessel S, Mackay TM, van Dieren S. et al; Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Group. Textbook outcome: nationwide analysis of a novel quality measure in pancreatic surgery. Ann Surg 2020; 271 (01) 155-162
- 34 Priego P, Cuadrado M, Ballestero A, Galindo J, Lobo E. Comparison of laparoscopic versus open gastrectomy for treatment of gastric cancer: analysis of a textbook outcome. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 2019; 29 (04) 458-464
- 35 Busweiler LA, Schouwenburg MG, van Berge Henegouwen MI. et al; Dutch Upper Gastrointestinal Cancer Audit (DUCA) group. Textbook outcome as a composite measure in oesophagogastric cancer surgery. Br J Surg 2017; 104 (06) 742-750
- 36 van der Kaaij RT, de Rooij MV, van Coevorden F. et al. Using textbook outcome as a measure of quality of care in oesophagogastric cancer surgery. Br J Surg 2018; 105 (05) 561-569
- 37 Merath K, Chen Q, Bagante F. et al. Textbook outcomes among Medicare patients undergoing hepatopancreatic surgery. Ann Surg 2020; 271 (06) 1116-1123
- 38 Poelemeijer YQM, Marang-van de Mheen PJ, Wouters MWJM, Nienhuijs SW, Liem RSL. Textbook outcome: an ordered composite measure for quality of bariatric surgery. Obes Surg 2019; 29 (04) 1287-1294
- 39 Moris D, Barbas AS. Textbook outcomes in liver transplantation. World J Surg 2021; 45 (04) 1259-1260
- 40 National Guideline. C., NICE Evidence Reviews Collection. In: Evidence Review for Preoperative Risk Stratification Tools: Perioperative Care in Adults: Evidence review C. London: National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) Copyright © NICE 2020; 2020. Accessed on Jan 10, 2023, at: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK561980/bin/niceng180er8_bm2.pdf
- 41 Howard R, Yin YS, McCandless L, Wang S, Englesbe M, Machado-Aranda D. Taking control of your surgery: impact of a prehabilitation program on major abdominal surgery. J Am Coll Surg 2019; 228 (01) 72-80
- 42 Copeland GP, Jones D, Walters M. POSSUM: a scoring system for surgical audit. Br J Surg 1991; 78 (03) 355-360
- 43 Prytherch DR, Whiteley MS, Higgins B, Weaver PC, Prout WG, Powell SJ. POSSUM and Portsmouth POSSUM for predicting mortality. Physiological and Operative Severity Score for the enUmeration of Mortality and morbidity. Br J Surg 1998; 85 (09) 1217-1220
- 44 Mir WAY, Fiumara F, Shrestha DB, Gaire S, Verda L. Utilizing the most accurate preoperative risk calculator. Cureus 2021; 13 (08) e17054
- 45 van Rooijen S, Carli F, Dalton SO. et al. Preoperative modifiable risk factors in colorectal surgery: an observational cohort study identifying the possible value of prehabilitation. Acta Oncol 2017; 56 (02) 329-334
- 46 Hughes MJ, Hackney RJ, Lamb PJ, Wigmore SJ, Christopher Deans DA, Skipworth RJE. Prehabilitation before major abdominal surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. World J Surg 2019; 43 (07) 1661-1668
- 47 Moran J, Guinan E, McCormick P. et al. The ability of prehabilitation to influence postoperative outcome after intra-abdominal operation: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Surgery 2016; 160 (05) 1189-1201
- 48 Mans CM, Reeve JC, Elkins MR. Postoperative outcomes following preoperative inspiratory muscle training in patients undergoing cardiothoracic or upper abdominal surgery: a systematic review and meta analysis. Clin Rehabil 2015; 29 (05) 426-438
- 49 Luft HS, Bunker JP, Enthoven AC. Should operations be regionalized? The empirical relation between surgical volume and mortality. N Engl J Med 1979; 301 (25) 1364-1369
- 50 Vonlanthen R, Lodge P, Barkun JS. et al. Toward a consensus on centralization in surgery. Ann Surg 2018; 268 (05) 712-724
- 51 Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien PA. Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg 2004; 240 (02) 205-213
- 52 Clavien PA, Sanabria JR, Strasberg SM. Proposed classification of complications of surgery with examples of utility in cholecystectomy. Surgery 1992; 111 (05) 518-526
- 53 Dell-Kuster S, Gomes NV, Gawria L. et al. Prospective validation of classification of intraoperative adverse events (ClassIntra): international, multicentre cohort study. BMJ 2020; 370: m2917
- 54 Ramly EP, Larentzakis A, Bohnen JD. et al. The financial impact of intraoperative adverse events in abdominal surgery. Surgery 2015; 158 (05) 1382-1388
- 55 Bohnen JD, Mavros MN, Ramly EP. et al. Intraoperative adverse events in abdominal surgery: what happens in the operating room does not stay in the operating room. Ann Surg 2017; 265 (06) 1119-1125
- 56 Eappen S, Lane BH, Rosenberg B. et al. Relationship between occurrence of surgical complications and hospital finances. JAMA 2013; 309 (15) 1599-1606
- 57 Rosenthal R, Hoffmann H, Dwan K, Clavien PA, Bucher HC. Reporting of adverse events in surgical trials: critical appraisal of current practice. World J Surg 2015; 39 (01) 80-87
- 58 Rosenthal R, Hoffmann H, Clavien PA, Bucher HC, Dell-Kuster S. Definition and Classification of Intraoperative Complications (CLASSIC): Delphi study and pilot evaluation. World J Surg 2015; 39 (07) 1663-1671
- 59 Gawria L, Rosenthal R, van Goor H, Dell-Kuster S. ClassIntra Study Group. Classification of intraoperative adverse events in visceral surgery. Surgery 2022; 171 (06) 1570-1579
- 60 Pearse RM, Moreno RP, Bauer P. et al; European Surgical Outcomes Study (EuSOS) group for the Trials groups of the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine and the European Society of Anaesthesiology. Mortality after surgery in Europe: a 7 day cohort study. Lancet 2012; 380 (9847): 1059-1065
- 61 Finks JF, Osborne NH, Birkmeyer JD. Trends in hospital volume and operative mortality for high-risk surgery. N Engl J Med 2011; 364 (22) 2128-2137
- 62 van der Wielen N, Daams F, Rosati R. et al. Health related quality of life following open versus minimally invasive total gastrectomy for cancer: results from a randomized clinical trial. Eur J Surg Oncol 2022; 48 (03) 553-560
- 63 Slankamenac K, Graf R, Barkun J, Puhan MA, Clavien PA. The comprehensive complication index: a novel continuous scale to measure surgical morbidity. Ann Surg 2013; 258 (01) 1-7
- 64 Clavien PA, Vetter D, Staiger RD. et al. The Comprehensive Complication Index (CCI®): added value and clinical perspectives 3 years “down the line”. Ann Surg 2017; 265 (06) 1045-1050
- 65 Silber JH, Williams SV, Krakauer H, Schwartz JS. Hospital and patient characteristics associated with death after surgery. A study of adverse occurrence and failure to rescue. Med Care 1992; 30 (07) 615-629
- 66 Birkmeyer JD, Siewers AE, Finlayson EV. et al. Hospital volume and surgical mortality in the United States. N Engl J Med 2002; 346 (15) 1128-1137
- 67 Needleman J, Buerhaus P, Pankratz VS, Leibson CL, Stevens SR, Harris M. Nurse staffing and inpatient hospital mortality. N Engl J Med 2011; 364 (11) 1037-1045
- 68 Diers J, Baum P, Lehmann K. et al. Disproportionately high failure to rescue rates after resection for colorectal cancer in the geriatric patient population - a nationwide study. Cancer Med 2022; 11 (22) 4256-4264
- 69 Minor S, Allen L, Meschino MT. et al; Canadian Collaborative on Urgent Care Surgery. Failure to rescue in emergency general surgery in Canada. Can J Surg 2022; 65 (02) E215-E220
- 70 Williamson CG, Sanaiha Y, Tran Z. et al. Disparities in cardiac arrest and failure to rescue after major elective noncardiac operations. Surgery 2022; 171 (05) 1358-1364
- 71 Yang Z, Wang L, Kang L. et al. Clinicopathologic characteristics and outcomes of patients with obstructive colorectal cancer. J Gastrointest Surg 2011; 15 (07) 1213-1222
- 72 Kadakia N, Mudgway R, Vo J. et al. Long-term outcomes of ventral hernia repair: an 11-year follow-up. Cureus 2020; 12 (08) e9523
- 73 Mantziari S, Dayer A, Duvoisin C. et al. Long-term weight loss, metabolic outcomes, and quality of life at 10 years after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass are independent of patients' age at baseline. Obes Surg 2020; 30 (04) 1181-1188
- 74 Callahan ZM, Amundson J, Su B, Kuchta K, Ujiki M. Outcomes after anti-reflux procedures: Nissen, Toupet, magnetic sphincter augmentation or anti-reflux mucosectomy?. Surg Endosc 2022
- 75 Marsh KM, Turrentine FE, Knight K. et al. Defining and studying errors in surgical care: a systematic review. Ann Surg 2022; 275 (06) 1067-1073
- 76 Reason J. Human Error. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press; 1990
- 77 Lavanchy JL, Zindel J, Kirtac K. et al. Automation of surgical skill assessment using a three-stage machine learning algorithm. Sci Rep 2021; 11 (01) 5197
- 78 Guerin S, Huaulmé A, Lavoue V, Jannin P, Timoh KN. Review of automated performance metrics to assess surgical technical skills in robot-assisted laparoscopy. Surg Endosc 2022; 36 (02) 853-870
- 79 Laplante S, Namazi B, Kiani P. et al. Validation of an artificial intelligence platform for the guidance of safe laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Surg Endosc 2022; DOI: 10.1007/s00464-022-09439-9.
- 80 Weiss A, Anderson JE, Chang DC. Comparing the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program with the Nationwide Inpatient Sample Database. JAMA Surg 2015; 150 (08) 815-816
- 81 Zhu Y, Simon GJ, Wick EC. et al. Applying machine learning across sites: external validation of a surgical site infection detection algorithm. J Am Coll Surg 2021; 232 (06) 963-971.e1
- 82 Skube SJ, Hu Z, Simon GJ. et al. Accelerating surgical site infection abstraction with a semi-automated machine-learning approach. Ann Surg 2022; 276 (01) 180-185
- 83 Sheetz KH, Dimick JB, Ghaferi AA. Impact of hospital characteristics on failure to rescue following major surgery. Ann Surg 2016; 263 (04) 692-697
- 84 Caiazzo R, Baud G, Clément G. et al. Impact of centralized management of bariatric surgery complications on 90-day mortality. Ann Surg 2018; 268 (05) 831-837
- 85 Ervin JN, Vitous CA, Wells EE, Krein SL, Friese CR, Ghaferi AA. Rescue improvement conference: a novel tool for addressing failure to rescue. Ann Surg 2021; DOI: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000004832.
- 86 Eldridge N, Wang Y, Metersky M. et al. Trends in adverse event rates in hospitalized patients, 2010-2019. JAMA 2022; 328 (02) 173-183
- 87 Gero D, Schneider MA, Suter M. et al. Sleeve gastrectomy or gastric bypass: a “post-code” lottery? A comprehensive national analysis of the utilization of bariatric surgery in Switzerland between 2011-2017. Surg Obes Relat Dis 2021; 17 (03) 563-574
- 88 Phoon KM, Afzal I, Sochart DH, Asopa V, Gikas P, Kader D. Environmental sustainability in orthopaedic surgery : a scoping review. Bone Jt Open 2022; 3 (08) 628-640
- 89 Melgar P, Rodríguez-Laiz GP, Lluís N. et al. Textbook outcome among patients undergoing enhanced recovery after liver transplantation stratified by risk. A single-center retrospective observational cohort study. Int J Surg 2022; 99: 106266
- 90 Diaz A, Dalmacy D, Herbert C, Mirdad RS, Hyer JM, Pawlik TM. Association of county-level racial diversity and likelihood of a textbook outcome following pancreas surgery. Ann Surg Oncol 2021; 28 (13) 8076-8084