Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31908214›Full record

ArticleThe American surgeon2019

Evaluating the ACS-NSQIP Risk Calculator in Primary GI Neuroendocrine Tumor: Results from the United States Neuroendocrine Tumor Study Group.

Emily A Armstrong, Eliza W Beal, Alexandra G Lopez-Aguiar, George Poultsides, John G Cannon, Flavio Rocha, Angelena Crown, James Barrett, Sean Ronnkleiv-Kelly, Ryan C Fields and 9 more

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The American surgeon, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 25% of its field
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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. The accuracy of hip fracture data entered into the national surgical quality improvement program (NSQIP) database.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2023
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

19 authors at 8 institutions in 1 country.

Emily A ArmstrongFrom the *Division of Surgical Oncology, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center and James Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, Ohio.
Eliza W BealFrom the *Division of Surgical Oncology, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center and James Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, Ohio.
Alexandra G Lopez-Aguiar†Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, Winship Cancer Institute, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia.
George Poultsides‡Department of Surgery, Stanford University, Palo Alto, California.
John G Cannon‡Department of Surgery, Stanford University, Palo Alto, California.
Flavio Rocha§Department of Surgery, Virginia Mason Medical Center, Seattle, Washington.
Angelena Crown§Department of Surgery, Virginia Mason Medical Center, Seattle, Washington.
James Barrett¶Department of Surgery, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, Wisconsin.
Sean Ronnkleiv-Kelly¶Department of Surgery, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, Wisconsin.
Ryan C Fields║Department of Surgery, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Michigan.
Bradley A Krasnick║Department of Surgery, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Michigan.
Kamran Idrees#Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, Tennessee; and.
Paula Marincola Smith#Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, Tennessee; and.
Hari Nathan**Division of Hepatopancreatobiliary and Advanced Gastrointestinal Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan.
Megan V Beems**Division of Hepatopancreatobiliary and Advanced Gastrointestinal Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan.
Shishir K Maithel†Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, Winship Cancer Institute, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia.
Carl R SchmidtFrom the *Division of Surgical Oncology, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center and James Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, Ohio.
Timothy M PawlikFrom the *Division of Surgical Oncology, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center and James Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, Ohio.
Mary DillhoffFrom the *Division of Surgical Oncology, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center and James Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, Ohio.
The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center · USEmory University · USStanford University · USUniversity of Michigan–Ann Arbor · USUniversity of Wisconsin–Madison · USVanderbilt University · USVirginia Mason Medical Center · USWashington University in St. Louis · US

Funding

Vanderbilt Clinical Oncology Research Career Development ProgramK12CA090625 · NCI · VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER · PI Debra L. Friedman, Paula Jill Hurley · 2001 to 2026
$16.9M
NCI NIH HHS K12 CA090625
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The ACS established an online risk calculator to help surgeons make patient-specific estimates of postoperative morbidity and mortality. Our objective was to assess the accuracy of the ACS-NSQIP calculator for estimating risk after curative intent resection for primary GI neuroendocrine tumors (GI-NETs). Adult patients with GI-NET who underwent complete resection from 2000 to 2017 were identified using a multi-institutional database, including data from eight academic medical centers. The ability of the NSQIP calculator to accurately predict a particular outcome was assessed using receiver operating characteristic curves and the area under the curve (AUC). Seven hundred three patients were identified who met inclusion criteria. The most commonly performed procedures were resection of the small intestine with anastomosis (N = 193, 26%) and partial colectomy with anastomosis (N = 136, 18%). The majority of patients were younger than 65 years (N = 482, 37%) and ASA Class III (N = 337, 48%). The most common comorbidities were diabetes (N = 128, 18%) and hypertension (N = 395, 56%). Complications among these patients based on ACS NSQIP definitions included any complication (N = 132, 19%), serious complication (N = 118, 17%), pneumonia (N = 7, 1.0%), cardiac complication (N = 1, 0.01%), SSI (N = 80, 11.4%), UTI (N = 17, 2.4%), venous thromboembolism (N = 18, 2.5%), renal failure (N = 16, 2.3%), return to the operating room (N = 27, 3.8%), discharge to nursing/rehabilitation (N = 22, 3.1%), and 30-day mortality (N = 9, 1.3%). The calculator provided reasonable estimates of risk for pneumonia (AUC = 0.721), cardiac complication (AUC = 0.773), UTI (AUC = 0.716), and discharge to nursing/rehabilitation (AUC = 0.779) and performed poorly (AUC < 0.7) for all other complications Fig. 1). The ACS-NSQIP risk calculator estimates a similar proportion of risk to actual events in patients with GI-NET but has low specificity for identifying the correct patients for many types of complications. The risk calculator may require modification for some patient populations.

Indexed as

AgedAged, 80 and overFemaleGastrointestinal NeoplasmsHumansMaleMiddle AgedNeuroendocrine TumorsPostoperative ComplicationsRetrospective StudiesRisk AssessmentRisk FactorsROC CurveTreatment OutcomeUnited States

Identifiers

PMID31908214
PMCPMC10188290
OpenAlexW3005059516

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.