ArticleLangenbeck's archives of surgery2023
Evaluation of the ACS NSQIP surgical risk calculator in patients undergoing common bile duct exploration.
Article in Langenbeck's archives of surgery, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Validation of the ACS-NSQIP surgical risk calculator for patients with paraoesophageal hernias undergoing robotic repair.Surgical endoscopy · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS NSQIP) surgical risk calculator is a risk stratification tool to help predict risks of postoperative complications, which is important for informed decision-making. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of the calculator in predicting postoperative complications in patients undergoing common bile duct (CBD) exploration.
methodsA retrospective chart review was completed for 305 patients that underwent open and laparoscopic CBD exploration at a single institution from 2010 to 2018. Patient demographics and preoperative risk factors were entered into the calculator, and the predicted complication risks were compared with observed complication rates. Brier score, C-statistic, and Hosmer-Lemeshow regression analysis were used to assess discrimination and calibration.
resultsThe observed rate exceeded the predicted rate for any complication (35.1% vs. 21%), return to operating room (5.9% vs. 3.6%), death (3.3% vs. 1%), and sepsis (3% vs. 2.4%). The model performed best in predicting serious complication (Brier 0.087, C-statistic 0.818, Hosmer-Lemeshow 0.695), surgical site infection (Brier 0.068, C-statistic 0.670, Hosmer-Lemeshow 0.292), discharge to rehabilitation facility (Brier 0.041, C-statistic 0.907, Hosmer-Lemeshow 0.638), and death (Brier 0.028, C-statistic 0.898, Hosmer-Lemeshow 0.004). In multivariable analysis, there was no statistically significant predicted complication type that affected the type of surgery.
conclusionThe calculator was accurate in predicting serious complication, surgical site infection, discharge to rehabilitation facility, and death. However, the model displayed poor predictive ability in all other complications that were analyzed.
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.