Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28233063›Full record

ArticleWorld journal of surgery2017

Derivation and Validation of a Novel Physiological Emergency Surgery Acuity Score (PESAS).

Naveen F Sangji, Jordan D Bohnen, Elie P Ramly, George C Velmahos, David C Chang, Haytham M A Kaafarani

Abstract readValidation Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in World journal of surgery, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Comparison of different scoring systems in predicting mortality and postoperative complications in acute care surgery patients at a Saudi Academic Centre.European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society · 2023
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. GI Surgical Emergencies: Scope and Burden of Disease.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2019
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Risk stratification tools in emergency general surgery.Trauma surgery & acute care open · 2018
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Naveen F SangjiDepartment of Surgery, Division of Trauma, Emergency Surgery, and Surgical Critical Care, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, 165 Cambridge Street, Suite 810, Boston, MA, 02114, USA.
Jordan D BohnenDepartment of Surgery, Division of Trauma, Emergency Surgery, and Surgical Critical Care, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, 165 Cambridge Street, Suite 810, Boston, MA, 02114, USA.
Elie P RamlyDepartment of Surgery, Division of Trauma, Emergency Surgery, and Surgical Critical Care, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, 165 Cambridge Street, Suite 810, Boston, MA, 02114, USA.
George C VelmahosDepartment of Surgery, Division of Trauma, Emergency Surgery, and Surgical Critical Care, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, 165 Cambridge Street, Suite 810, Boston, MA, 02114, USA.
David C ChangCodman Center for Clinical Effectiveness in Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
Haytham M A KaafaraniDepartment of Surgery, Division of Trauma, Emergency Surgery, and Surgical Critical Care, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, 165 Cambridge Street, Suite 810, Boston, MA, 02114, USA. hkaafarani@mgh.harvard.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWe present a novel and abbreviated Physiological Emergency Surgery Acuity Score (PESAS) that assesses the severity of disease at presentation in patients undergoing Emergency Surgery (ES).

methodsUsing the 2011 ACS-NSQIP database, we identified all patients who underwent "emergent" surgery. The following methodology was designed: (1) identification of independent predictors of 30-day mortality that are markers of acuity; (2) derivation of PESAS based on the relative impact (i.e., odds ratio) of each predictor; and (3) measurement of the c-statistic. The PESAS was validated using the 2012 ACS-NSQIP database.

resultsFrom 24,702 ES cases, a 15-point score was derived. This included 10 components with a range of 0 and 15 points. Its c-statistic was 0.80. Mortality gradually increased from 1.7 to 40.6 to 100% at scores of 0, 8, and 15, respectively. In the validation phase, PESAS c-statistic remained stable.

conclusionPESAS is a novel score that assesses the acuity of disease at presentation in ES patients and strongly correlates with postoperative mortality risk. PESAS could prove useful for preoperative counseling and for risk-adjusted benchmarking.

Indexed as

EmergenciesSeverity of Illness IndexAdultAgedDatabases, FactualFemaleHumansLogistic ModelsMaleMiddle AgedRisk AssessmentSurgical Procedures, Operative

Identifiers

PMID28233063

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.