Severity grading of unexpected events in paediatric surgery: evaluation of five classification systems and the Comprehensive Complication Index (CCI®)

Omid Madadi-Sanjani, Christoph Zoeller, Joachim F Kuebler, Alejandro D Hofmann, Jens Dingemann, Soeren Wiesner, Julia Brendel, Benno M Ure, Omid Madadi-Sanjani, Christoph Zoeller, Joachim F Kuebler, Alejandro D Hofmann, Jens Dingemann, Soeren Wiesner, Julia Brendel, Benno M Ure

Abstract

Background: Postoperative adverse events may be associated with substantial morbidity and mortality. Numerous severity grading systems for these events have been introduced and validated but have not yet been systematically applied in paediatric surgery. This study aimed to analyse the advantages and disadvantages of these classifications in a paediatric cohort.

Methods: Unexpected events associated with interventional or organizational problems in the department of paediatric surgery during 2017-2020 were prospectively documented daily for all children. Events were classified according to the Clavien-Dindo grading system during monthly morbidity and mortality conferences. All events were also classified according to five additional grading systems: T92, contracted Accordion, expanded Accordion, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, and Comprehensive Complication Index (CCI)®.

Results: Of 6296 patients, 673 (10.7 per cent) developed adverse events and 240 (35.7 per cent) had multiple events. Overall, 1253 adverse events were identified; of these, 574 (45.2 per cent) were associated with surgical or medical interventions and 679 (54.8 per cent) included organizational problems. The grading systems demonstrated high overall correlation (rpears = 0.9), with minor differences in sentinel events. The Clavien-Dindo classification offered the most detailed assessment. However, these details had only limited additional value. The CCI® scores were correlated with other grading systems (rpears = 0.9) and were useful in analysing multiple events within individual patients.

Conclusion: Grading systems demonstrated similar scoring patterns for minor and sentinel events, with none being superior for unexpected events in children. However, the CCI® can be a major improvement in assessing morbidity in patients with multiple events. Its use is therefore recommended in prospective studies on paediatric surgery.

© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of BJS Society Ltd.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Assessment of five severity grading systems stratified in terms of grading, and a box plot for the CCI®, with visualization of the mean(s.d.) for 1253 adverse events and 771 CCI® scores in 673 patients; CCI®, Comprehensive Complication Index.
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Correlation between the highest Clavien–Dindo grade in 673 patients with multiple adverse events and 771 CCI® scores for a total of 1253 adverse events. CCI®, Comprehensive Complication Index.

References

    1. Tevis ES, Cobian AG, Truong HP, Craven MW, Kennedy GD.. Implications of multiple complications on the postoperative recovery of general surgery patients. Ann Surg 2016;263:1213–1218.
    1. Khuri SF, Henderson WG, DePalma RG, Mosca C, Healey NA, Kumbhani DJ; participants in the VA National Surgical Quality Improvement Program. Determinants of long-term survival after major surgery and the adverse effect of postoperative complications. Ann Surg 2005;242:326–341.
    1. Clavien PA, Sanabria JR, Strasberg SM.. Proposed classification of complications of surgery with examples of utility in cholecystectomy. Surgery 1992;111:518–526.
    1. 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;240:205–213.
    1. Rogmark P, Petersson U, Bringman S, Eklund A, Ezra E, Sevonius D. et al. Short-term outcomes for open and laparoscopic midline incisional hernia repair: a randomized multicenter controlled trial: the ProLOVE (prospective randomized trial on open versus laparoscopic operation of ventral eventrations) trial. Ann Surg 2013;258:37–45.
    1. Danielsen AK, Park J, Jansen JE, Bock D, Skullman S, Wedin A. et al. Early closure of a temporary ileostomy in patients with rectal cancer: a multicenter randomized controlled trial. Ann Surg 2017;265:284–290.
    1. Maggiori L, Rullier E, Lefevre JH, Régimbeau JM, Berdah S, Karoui M. et al. Does a combination of laparoscopic approach and full fast track multimodal management decrease postoperative morbidity? A multicenter randomized controlled trial. Ann Surg 2017;266:729–737.
    1. Mitropoulos D, Artibani W, Biyani CS, Jensen JB, Roupret M, Truss M.. Validation of the Clavien–Dindo grading system in urology by the European Association of Urology Guidelines Ad Hoc Panel. Eur Urol Focus 2018;4:608–613.
    1. Inaraja-Pérez GC, Júlvez-Blancas M.. Usefulness of the Clavien–Dindo classification to rate complications after carotid endarterectomy and its implications in patient prognosis. Ann Vasc Surg 2019;55:232–238.
    1. Naumann DN, Vincent LE, Pearson N, Beaven A, Smith IM, Smith K. et al. An adapted Clavien–Dindo scoring system in trauma as a clinically meaningful non-mortality endpoint. J Trauma Acute Care Surg 2017;83:241–248.
    1. Martin RCG, Brennan MF, Jaques DP.. Quality of complication reporting in the surgical literature. Ann Surg 2002;235:803–813.
    1. Strasberg SM, Linehan DC, Hawkins WG.. The accordion severity grading system of surgical complications. Ann Surg 2009;250:177–186.
    1. 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;258:1–7.
    1. Staiger RD, Cimino M, Javed A, Biondo S, Fondevila C, Périnel J. et al. The Comprehensive Complication Index (CCI®) is a novel cost assessment tool for surgical procedures. Ann Surg 2018;268:784–791.
    1. Linecker M, Botea F, Raptis DA, Nicolaescu D, Limani P, Alikhanov R. et al. Perioperative omega-3 fatty acids fail to confer protection in liver surgery: results of a multicentric, double-blind, randomized controlled trial. J Hepatol 2020;72:498–505.
    1. Poves I, Burdio F, Morató O, Iglesias M, Radosevic A, Ilzarbe L. et al. Comparison of perioperative outcomes between laparoscopic and open approach for pancreatoduodenectomy: the PADULAP randomized controlled trial. Ann Surg 2018;268:731–739.
    1. Slankamenac K, Nederlof N, Pessaux P, de Jonge J, Wijnhoven BPL, Breitenstein S. et al. The comprehensive complication index: a novel and more sensitive endpoint for assessing outcome and reducing sample size in randomized controlled trials. Ann Surg 2014;260:757–762.
    1. Sethi MVA, Zimmer J, Ure BM, Lacher M.. Prospective assessment of complications on a daily basis is essential to determine morbidity and mortality in routine pediatric surgery. J Pediatr Surg 2016;51:630–633.
    1. Zoeller C, Kuebler JF, Ure BM, Brendel J.. Incidence of complications, organizational problems, and errors: unexpected events in 1605 patients. J Pediatr Surg 2021;56:1723–1727.
    1. Von Elm E, , AltmanDG, , EggerM, , PocockSJ, , GøtzschePC, , Vandenbroucke JP.. The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. PLoS Med 2007;4:e296.
    1. Mazeh H, Cohen O, Mizrahi I, Hamburger T, Stojadinovic A, Abu-Wasel B. et al. Prospective validation of a surgical complications grading system in a cohort of 2114 patients. J Surg Res 2014;188:30–36.
    1. Horan TC, Andrus M, Dudeck MA.. CDC/NHSN surveillance definition of health care-associated infection and criteria for specific types of infections in the acute care setting. Am J Infect Control 2008;36:309–332.
    1. Grober ED, Bohnen JMA.. Defining medical error. Can J Surg 2005;48:39–44.
    1. Rodziewicz TL, Houseman B, Hipskind JE.. Medical Error Reduction and Prevention . In: StatPearls. Treasure Island: StatPearls Publishing, 2021. .
    1. Kooby DA, Fong Y, Suriawinata A, Gonen M, Allen PJ, Klimstra DS. et al. Impact of steatosis on perioperative outcome following hepatic resection. J Gastrointest Surg 2003;7:1034–1044.
    1. Strong VE, Selby LV, Sovel M, Disa JJ, Hoskins W, Dematteo R. et al. Development and assessment of Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center’s Surgical Secondary Events grading system. Ann Surg Oncol 2015;22:1061–1067.
    1. Habre W, Disma N, Virag K, Becke K, Hansen TG, Jöhr M. et al. Incidence of severe critical events in paediatric anaesthesia (APRICOT): a prospective multicentre observational study in 261 hospitals in Europe. Lancet Resp Med 2017;5:412–425.
    1. Grunwell JR, McCracken C, Fortenberyy J, Stockwell J, Kamat P.. Risk factors leading to failed procedural sedation in children outside the operating room. Pediatr Emerg Care 2014;30:381–387.
    1. Grunwell JR, Travers C, McCracken CE, Scherrer PD, Stormorken AG, Chumpitazi CE. et al. Procedural sedation outside of the operating room using ketamine in 22,645 children: a report from the pediatric sedation research consortium. Pediatr Crit Care Med 2016;17:1109–1116.
    1. Lee JR, Lee JH, Lee HM, Kim N, Kim MH.. Independent risk factors for adverse events associated with propofol-based pediatric sedation performed by anesthesiologists in the radiology suite: a prospective observational study. Eur J Pediatr 2021;180:1413–1422.

Source: PubMed

Sponsorer og samarbeidspartnere

Medisinsk tilstand

Legemiddelintervensjoner

3
Abonnere