Evaluating Unplanned Returns to the Operating Room in Head and Neck Free Flap Patients
- 43 Downloads
Head and neck oncologic surgery with reconstruction represents one of the most complex operations in otolaryngology. Unplanned return to the operating room represents an objective measure of postoperative complications. The purpose of this study was to identify reasons and risk factors for unplanned return to the operating room in patients undergoing head and neck surgery with reconstruction.
This retrospective cohort study of 467 patients undergoing head and neck surgery with free flap reconstruction used a previously-developed Head and Neck-Reconstructive Surgery-specific National Surgical Quality Improvement Program. Disease and site-specific preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative data were gathered. Comparisons between those with and without an unexpected return to the operating room were completed with univariate and multiple logistic regression models.
The rate of unexpected return to the operating room was 18.8% (88 patients). Most common reasons for URTOR were flap compromise (24 patients, 5.1%), postoperative infection (21 patients, 4.5%), and hematoma (20 patients, 4.3%). Two risk factors were identified by multivariate analysis: coagulopathy (ORadjusted = 2.83, 95% CI = 1.24–6.19, P = 0.010), and use of alcohol (ORadjusted = 1.9, 95% CI = 1.14–3.33, P = 0.025).
Preexisting coagulopathy and increased alcohol consumption were associated with increased risk of unexpected return to the operating room. These findings can aid physicians in preoperative patient counseling and medical optimization and can inform more precise risk stratification of patients undergoing head and neck surgery with reconstruction. Strategies to prevent and mitigate unexpected returns to the operating room will improve patient outcomes, decrease resource utilization, and facilitate successful integration into alternative payment models.
Samantha Tam, Randal S. Weber, Jun Liu, Jose Ting, Summer Hanson, and Carol M. Lewis declare that they have no conflict of interest.
- 3.Khuri SF, Daley J, Henderson W, et al. The national veterans administration surgical risk study: risk adjustment for the comparative assessment of the quality of surgical care. J Am Coll Surg. 1995;180(5):519–531.Google Scholar
- 4.Khuri SF, Daley J, Henderson W, et al. The Department of veterans affairs’ NSQIP: the first national, validated, outcome-based, risk-adjusted, and peer-controlled program for the measurement and enhancement of the quality of surgical care. National VA surgical quality improvement program. Ann Surg. 1998;228(4):491–507.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 7.Arce K, Moore EJ, Lohse CM, Reiland MD, Yetzer JG, Ettinger KS. The American college of surgeons national surgical quality improvement program surgical risk calculator does not accurately predict risk of 30-day complications among patients undergoing microvascular head and neck reconstruction. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2016;74(9):1850–1858.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 17.Cannady SB, Hatten KM, Bur AM, et al. Use of free tissue transfer in head and neck cancer surgery and risk of overall and serious complication(s): an American College Of Surgeons-National Surgical Quality Improvement Project analysis of free tissue transfer to the head and neck. Head Neck. 2017;39(4):702–707.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 20.Trevejo-Nunez G, Kolls JK, de Wit M. Alcohol use as a risk factor in infections and healing: a clinician’s perspective. Alcohol Res 2015;37(2):177–184.Google Scholar
- 26.Gueret G, Bourgain JL, Luboinski B. Sudden death after major head and neck surgery. Current. 2006;14(2):89–94.Google Scholar
- 34.Corbitt C, Skoracki RJ, Yu P, Hanasono MM. Free flap failure in head and neck reconstruction. Head Neck. 2014;36(10):1440–1445.Google Scholar