ArticleANZ journal of surgery2025
Validation of the Emergency Surgery Acuity Score in Patients Who Underwent Emergency General Surgery in South Korea: A Multi-Centre, Retrospective, Post Hoc Analysis.
Article in ANZ journal of surgery, 2025. 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.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThis study aimed to validate the Emergency Surgery Acuity Score (ESAS) in Korean patients who underwent emergency general surgery (EGS) and evaluate its effectiveness in predicting various outcomes.
designRetrospective cohort study.
settingTwo tertiary hospitals in South Korea.
participantsThis study included 1629 adults who underwent EGS between July 2014 and December 2019. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The ESAS and its abbreviated version, the Physiological Emergency Surgery Acuity Score (P-ESAS), were calculated for each patient. Predictive performance was assessed for 28-day mortality, post-operative complications, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, and hospital length of stay (LOS). C-statistics were used to compare ESAS with P-ESAS and other scoring systems, including the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI). Logistic regression models were employed to identify independent predictors of 28-day mortality, incorporating clinically relevant covariates such as demographic characteristics, comorbidities, physiological parameters, and surgical factors.
resultsThe ESAS and P-ESAS demonstrated superior predictive abilities compared to the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) across clinical outcomes. For 28-day mortality, the c-statistics were 0.917 for ESAS, 0.897 for P-ESAS, and 0.691 for CCI. Both ESAS and P-ESAS outperformed CCI in predicting post-operative complications (c-statistics: 0.701, 0.677, and 0.637, respectively) and ICU admission (c-statistics: 0.777, 0.737, and 0.645, respectively). Linear regression analysis revealed a significant relationship between ESAS and hospital length of stay (LOS = 2.96 × ESAS; p < 0.001, adjR
conclusionThe ESAS is validated as an effective tool for predicting 28-day mortality, post-operative complications, ICU admission, and hospital LOS in Korean patients undergoing emergency general surgery. Its predictive performance compared to other scoring systems highlights its potential to improve risk stratification and resource management in emergency surgery settings.
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.