ArticleWorld journal of surgery2007
Impact of preoperative physiological risk profile on postoperative morbidity and mortality after emergency operation of complicated peptic ulcer disease.
Article in World journal of surgery, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 28 citations in OpenAlex.
- Are admission laboratory values in isolation meaningful for predicting surgical outcome in patients with perforated peptic ulcers?Surgery open science · 2023Article
- Short- and long-term outcomes of surgical management of peptic ulcer complications in the era of proton pump inhibitors.European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society · 2018Article
- Scoring systems for outcome prediction in patients with perforated peptic ulcer.Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine · 2013Review
- Risk evaluation in cutaneous melanoma patients undergoing lymph node dissection: impact of POSSUM.Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England · 2011Article
- Preoperative risk evaluation of postoperative morbidity in IBD patients--impact of the POSSUM score.International journal of colorectal disease · 2011Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimThe aim of this study was to evaluate the preoperative physiological risk profile for postoperative morbidity and mortality after emergency treatment of complicated peptic ulcer disease (PUD).
methodsOperative notes and hospital files of 261 patients--111 female, 150 male; median age 67 years (range 17-100 years)--undergoing an emergency operation from 1993 to 2005 were analyzed retrospectively. The physiologic subscore of the POSSUM score (POSSUM-phys) was analyzed with regard to predicting postoperative complications. Follow-up was obtained from questionnaires sent to family practitioners or by patient interviews.
resultsThe overall complication rate was 44%, and mortality was 24%. Among risk factors studied (e.g., sex, patient's age, duration of symptoms, type of surgery), a high POSSUM-phys score was the strongest predictor for postoperative sepsis, anastomotic/suture dehiscence, postoperative bleeding, and mortality. Cut points for patients at risk could be calculated. Surgical procedures (organ-preserving versus resection) had no influence when matched for POSSUM-phys score. Nevertheless, organ resections were associated with higher scores. Recurrent PUD was a rare event (7.6%).
conclusionThe preoperative physiologic POSSUM score is a promising instrument for identifying patients at increased risk to develop major postoperative complications after emergency surgery for complicated PUD. Prospective studies are needed to prove its applicability for adjusting treatment to individual patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.