Skip to main content
Log in

Comparative Validation of Abdominal CT Models that Predict Need for Surgery in Adhesion-Related Small-Bowel Obstruction

  • Original Scientific Report
  • Published:
World Journal of Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Introduction

Adhesion-related small-bowel obstruction (ASBO) can be managed without surgery in selected patients. The aim of this study was to validate three previously published computed tomography (CT) models that predict need for surgery.

Methods

A retrospective study of patients with ASBO admitted to a tertiary referral hospital between November 2009 and April 2015 was conducted. Data on clinical variables were extracted from medical records. CT signs were assessed by a radiologist who was blinded to whether or not the patients required surgery. Three previously published models were validated by testing their ability to predict need for surgery.

Results

The cohort comprised 233 patients with ASBO (mean age 69.7 years, 47.6% male), of whom 73 (31.3%) required surgery. A predictive model using a combination of mesenteric oedema, free intraperitoneal fluid and absence of small-bowel faecalisation had a sensitivity of 38% [95% CI 27–50%], specificity of 88% [81–92%], positive likelihood ratio (LR+) of 3.1 [1.6–5.1] and negative likelihood ratio (LR−) of 0.7 [0.6–0.8]. Only the results of one previously published model (which used a combination of obstipation, free intraperitoneal fluid and high-grade or complete obstruction) could be reproduced. This model had a potentially clinically useful LR+ of 2.9 [1.1–7.4] and LR− of 0.9 [0.8–1.0]. The poor performances of the other two models may be partially explained by measurement bias.

Conclusion

The performances of the previously published predictive models in this validation study were varied. Future attempts to develop models should use clearly defined, standardised and reproducible predictors wherever possible.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Di Saverio S, Coccolini F, Galati M et al (2013) Bologna guidelines for diagnosis and management of adhesive small bowel obstruction (ASBO): 2013 update of the evidence-based guidelines from the world society of emergency surgery ASBO working group. World J Emerg Surg 8:42

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Pricolo VE, Curley F (2016) CT scan findings do not predict outcome of nonoperative management in small bowel obstruction: retrospective analysis of 108 consecutive patients. Int J Surg 27:88–91

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Williams SB, Greenspon J, Young HA et al (2005) Small bowel obstruction: conservative vs. surgical management. Dis Colon Rectum 48:1140–1146

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Zielinski MD, Eiken PW, Bannon MP et al (2010) Small bowel obstruction—who needs an operation? A multivariate prediction model. World J Surg 34:910–919. doi:10.1007/s00268-010-0479-3

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Zielinski MD, Eiken PW, Heller SF et al (2011) Prospective, observational validation of a multivariate small-bowel obstruction model to predict the need for operative intervention. J Am Coll Surg 212:1068–1076

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Chang WC, Ko KH, Lin CS et al (2014) Features on MDCT that predict surgery in patients with adhesive-related small bowel obstruction. PLoS ONE 9:e89804

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Kulvatunyou N, Pandit V, Moutamn S et al (2015) A multi-institution prospective observational study of small bowel obstruction: clinical and computerized tomography predictors of which patients may require early surgery. J Trauma Acute Care Surg 79:393–398

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Ceresoli M, Coccolini F, Catena F et al (2016) Water-soluble contrast agent in adhesive small bowel obstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic and therapeutic value. Am J Surg 211:1114–1125

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Lien I, Wong SW, Malouf P et al (2014) Effect of handover on the outcomes of small bowel obstruction in an acute care surgery model. ANZ J Surg 84:442–447

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. McGee S (2002) Simplifying likelihood ratios. J Gen Intern Med 17:646–649

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Debray TP, Vergouwe Y, Koffijberg H et al (2015) A new framework to enhance the interpretation of external validation studies of clinical prediction models. J Clin Epidemiol 68:279–289

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Moons KG, Royston P, Vergouwe Y et al (2009) Prognosis and prognostic research: what, why, and how? BMJ 338:b375

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Sheedy SP, Earnest F, Fletcher JG et al (2006) CT of small-bowel ischemia associated with obstruction in emergency department patients: diagnostic performance evaluation. Radiology 241:729–736

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Millet I, Taourel P, Ruyer A et al (2015) Value of CT findings to predict surgical ischemia in small bowel obstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Radiol 25:1823–1835

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Millet I, Ruyer A, Alili C et al (2014) Adhesive small-bowel obstruction: value of CT in identifying findings associated with the effectiveness of nonsurgical treatment. Radiology 273:425–432

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Phillip F. Yang.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Yang, P.F., Rabinowitz, D.P., Wong, S.W. et al. Comparative Validation of Abdominal CT Models that Predict Need for Surgery in Adhesion-Related Small-Bowel Obstruction. World J Surg 41, 940–947 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-016-3796-3

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-016-3796-3

Keywords

Navigation