ArticleCureus2024
Evaluating the Emergency Surgery Score (ESS) in Predicting Postoperative Outcomes Following Emergency Laparotomy: Insights From an Indian Tertiary Center.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
AIMS AND
objectivesTo determine the predictive value of Emergency Surgery Score (ESS) with regard to mortality and morbidity rates of patients undergoing emergency laparotomy.
methodThe ESS ranging from 0 to 29 is an extensive risk calculator based on 22 variables including important parameters like demographics, preoperative treatment, comorbidities, and laboratory values. Twenty patients who underwent emergency laparotomy were preoperatively assessed and ESS was calculated for each. After establishment of diagnosis and resuscitation, the patient was taken up for emergency laparotomy. Postoperatively, patients were monitored clinically as well as with laboratory and radiological investigations as per case needed till discharge and further followed up physically in OPD/ward or interviewed telephonically for 30 days on a weekly basis. Incidence of mortality and morbidity in terms of postoperative complications, ICU admission, reoperation and readmission among the cases occurring within 30 days of procedure were recorded.
resultsESS correlated well with the outcome in the current study, 10 out of 14 patients with score less than 8 were discharged without any complications. Mean ESS was higher among non-survivors. Ability of ESS to predict postoperative mortality, morbidity and ICU stay was proven statistically with c-statistics of 0.853, 0.84, 0.879 respectively. ESS was found to be a good predictor for the development of postoperative lower respiratory tract infection (LRTI) (c-statistic=0.828), sepsis (c-statistic=0.867), disseminated intravascular coagulation (DIC) (c-statistic=0.805), acute kidney injury (AKI) (c-statistic=0.804). ESS showed poor correlation with reoperation and readmission rates.
conclusionThe current study underscores the critical importance of employing risk stratification through ESS for patients undergoing emergency laparotomy. By employing ESS, healthcare professionals can accurately anticipate resuscitation requirements and stabilize patients preoperatively. This proactive approach enables the identification and optimization of patients unsuitable for immediate surgery, facilitating informed decisions on targeted treatment, surgical intervention, and postoperative care pathways.
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.