Predicting mortality in patients admitted to the intensive care unit after open vascular surgery
- 17 Downloads
Vascular surgery (VS) has a higher perioperative mortality than other types of surgery. We compared different scores for predicting mortality in patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) after open VS.
Patients admitted to the ICU after open VS from 2006 to 2013 were included. We calculated the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE), Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS), Physiological and Operative Severity Score for the enUmeration of Mortality and Morbidity (POSSUM) and Preoperative Score to Predict Postoperative Mortality (POSPOM). We performed multivariate logistic regression to assess independent factors with the calculation of odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We tested the predictive ability of the scores using the area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUROC).
A total of 833 consecutive patients were included. Hospital mortality was 5.1% (1.3% after intermediate-risk and 8.4% after high-risk surgery). In the multivariate analysis, the age (OR 1.04, 95% CI 1.01–1.08, p = 0.013), smoking status (OR 2.46, 95% CI 1.16–5.21, p = 0.019), surgery risk (OR 2.92, 95% CI 1.05–8.08, p = 0.040), serum sodium level (OR 1.17, 95% CI 1.10–1.26, p < 0.001), urea (OR 1.01, 95% CI 1.01–1.02, p = 0.001) and leukocyte count (OR 1.05, 95% CI 1.01–1.10, p = 0.009) at admission were considered independent predictors. Hematocrit (0.86, 95% CI 0.80–0.93, p < 0.001) was considered an independent protective factor. The AUROC of our model was 0.860, compared to SAPS (0.752), APACHE (0.774), POSPOM (0.798) and POSSUM (0.829).
The observed mortality was within the predicted range (1–5% after intermediate-risk and > 5% after high-risk surgery). POSSUM and POSPOM had slightly better predictive capacity than SAPS or APACHE.
KeywordsHospital mortality SAPS APACHE Intensive care unit Vascular surgery
All authors were involved in data collection. PR was responsible for the data analysis and manuscript writing. FA coordinated the project and revised the manuscript. All authors approved the final version of the manuscript.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
All authors have nothing to declare.
- 6.Khuri SF, Henderson WG, DePalma RG, Mosca C, Healey NA, Kumbhani DJ, et al. Determinants of long-term survival after major surgery and the adverse effect of postoperative complications. Ann Surg. 2005;242(3):326–41.Google Scholar
- 11.Hall BL, Hamilton BH, Richards K, Bilimoria KY, Cohen ME, Ko CY. Does surgical quality improve in the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program: an evaluation of all participating hospitals. Ann Surg. 2009;250(3):363–76.Google Scholar
- 24.Kristensen SD, Knuuti J, Saraste A, Anker S, Botker HE, De Hert S, et al. 2014 ESC/ESA Guidelines on non-cardiac surgery: cardiovascular assessment and management: the Joint Task Force on non-cardiac surgery: cardiovascular assessment and management of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and the European Society of Anaesthesiology (ESA). Eur J Anaesthesiol. 2014;31(10):517–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 34.Lindner G, Funk GC. Hypernatremia in critically ill patients. J Crit Care. 2013;28(2):216.Google Scholar
- 36.Skonetzki S, Lüders F, Engelbertz C, Malyar NM, Freisinger E, Meyborg M, et al. Aging and outcome in patients with peripheral artery disease and critical limb ischemia. J Post-Acute Long-Term Care Med. 2016;17(10):927–32.Google Scholar
- 37.Maia PC, Abelha FJ. Predictors of major postoperative cardiac complications in a surgical ICU. Portug J Cardiol. 2008;27(3):321–8.Google Scholar
- 38.Abelha FJ, Botelho M, Fernandes V, Barros H. Quality of life and mortality assessment in patients with major cardiac events in the postoperative period. Rev Br Anestesiol. 2010;60(3):268–84.Google Scholar