A Systematic Review of Intra- and Postoperative Complication Reporting and Grading in Urological Surgery: Understanding the Pitfalls and a Path Forward.

Complication grading Complication reporting Health care quality Intraoperative complications Postoperative complications Surgical care Systematic review Urological surgery

Journal

European urology oncology
ISSN: 2588-9311
Titre abrégé: Eur Urol Oncol
Pays: Netherlands
ID NLM: 101724904

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
08 2023
Historique:
received: 18 03 2022
revised: 30 11 2022
accepted: 02 01 2023
medline: 31 7 2023
pubmed: 26 1 2023
entrez: 25 1 2023
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Surgical outcomes and patient morbidity are often surrogate markers of health care quality and efficiency. These parameters can only be used with confidence if the reporting and grading of intra- and postoperative complications are reliable and reproducible. Without uniformity and regulation, the risk of under-reporting, and thus significant underestimation of the burden of intra- and postoperative morbidity, is high and should be of great concern to the international surgical community. To assess the quality and utility of currently available reporting and classification systems for intra- and postoperative complications, recognise their advantages and pitfalls, discuss the overall implications of these systems for urological surgery, and identify potential solutions for future reporting and classification systems. A comprehensive search was performed using multiple reputable databases and trial registries up to October 25, 2022. Only studies that adhered to predefined inclusion criteria were included. Study selection and data extraction were independently performed by two review authors. The review was performed according to strict methodological guidelines in line with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses 2020 statement. A total of 13 papers highlighting 13 various complication systems were critically assessed in this review. All studies proposed an intra- or postoperative complication reporting or grading system that was surgically related. At present, there is no single instrument in clinical practice to account for all relevant complication data. Six of the 13 studies were clinically validated (46%) and only three studies were urology-focused (23%). Meta-analysis was not possible. Current individual complication tools are flawed, so there is a need for a novel, all-inclusive, specialty-specific reporting and classification system for intra- and postoperative complications. If successfully validated and integrated worldwide, such an instrument would have the potential to play a significant role in reshaping efficiency in health care systems and improving surgical and patient quality of care. Current tools for reporting and classifying complications during and after surgery underestimate how burdensome such complications can be for patients. We summarise the reporting and classification tools currently available, discuss their advantages and drawbacks, and propose potential solutions for future systems. Our review can help in better understanding the changes required for future tools and how to improve overall surgical outcomes for patients.

Identifiants

pubmed: 36697322
pii: S2588-9311(23)00003-2
doi: 10.1016/j.euo.2023.01.002
pii:
doi:

Types de publication

Systematic Review Journal Article Review Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

378-389

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2023 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Auteurs

Christopher Soliman (C)

Department of Urology, The University of Melbourne, The Royal Melbourne Hospital, Parkville, Australia. Electronic address: chrissol1312@gmail.com.

Niranjan J Sathianathen (NJ)

Department of Urology, The University of Melbourne, The Royal Melbourne Hospital, Parkville, Australia.

Benjamin C Thomas (BC)

Department of Urology, The University of Melbourne, The Royal Melbourne Hospital, Parkville, Australia.

Gianluca Giannarini (G)

Unit of Urology, Santa Maria della Misericordia Academic Medical Center, Udine, Italy.

Nathan Lawrentschuk (N)

Department of Urology, The University of Melbourne, The Royal Melbourne Hospital, Parkville, Australia.

Patrick Y Wuethrich (PY)

Department of Anaesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.

Philip Dundee (P)

Department of Urology, The University of Melbourne, The Royal Melbourne Hospital, Parkville, Australia.

Rajesh Nair (R)

Department of Urology, Guy's and St. Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.

Marc A Furrer (MA)

Department of Urology, The University of Melbourne, The Royal Melbourne Hospital, Parkville, Australia; Department of Urology, Guy's and St. Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK; Department of Urology, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland; Department of Urology, Solothurner Spitäler AG, Olten and Solothurn, Switzerland.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH