Risk Stratification Tools for Predicting Morbidity and Mortality in Adult Patients Undergoing Major Surgery: Qualitative Systematic Review

• Published in: Anesthesiology (Philadelphia) 2013-10, Vol.119 (4), p.959-981
• Main Authors: MOONESINGHE, Suneetha Ramani, MYTHEN, Michael G, DAS, Priya, ROWAN, Kathryn M, GROCOTT, Michael P. W
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Adult; Anesthesia; Anesthesia. Intensive care medicine. Transfusions. Cell therapy and gene therapy; Biological and medical sciences; Decision Support Techniques; Humans; Medical sciences; Postoperative Complications - mortality; Risk Assessment; Surgical Procedures, Operative - mortality; Surgical Procedures, Operative - statistics & numerical data; Treatment Outcome
• ISSN: 0003-3022; 1528-1175
• DOI: 10.1097/ALN.0b013e3182a4e94d

Risk stratification is essential for both clinical risk prediction and comparative audit. There are a variety of risk stratification tools available for use in major noncardiac surgery, but their discrimination and calibration have not previously been systematically reviewed in heterogeneous patient cohorts.Embase, MEDLINE, and Web of Science were searched for studies published between January 1, 1980 and August 6, 2011 in adult patients undergoing major noncardiac, nonneurological surgery. Twenty-seven studies evaluating 34 risk stratification tools were identified which met inclusion criteria. The Portsmouth-Physiology and Operative Severity Score for the enUmeration of Mortality and the Surgical Risk Scale were demonstrated to be the most consistently accurate tools that have been validated in multiple studies; however, both have limitations. Future work should focus on further evaluation of these and other parsimonious risk predictors, including validation in international cohorts. There is also a need for studies examining the impact that the use of these tools has on clinical decision making and patient outcome.