Author:
Sliwinski Svenja,Faqar-Uz-Zaman Sara Fatima,Heil Jan,Mohr Lisa,Detemble Charlotte,Dreilich Julia,Zmuc Dora,Bechstein Wolf O.,Becker Sven,Chun Felix,Derwich Wojciech,Schreiner Waldemar,Solbach Christine,Fleckenstein Johannes,Filmann Natalie,Schnitzbauer Andreas A.
Abstract
Abstract
Background
A structured risk assessment of patients with validated and evidence-based tools can help to identify modifiable factors before major surgeries. The Protego Maxima trial investigated the value of a new digitized risk assessment tool that combines tools which can be easily used and implemented in the clinical workflow by doctors and qualified medical staff. The hypothesis was that the structured assessment and risk-grouping is predictive of short-term surgical quality reflected by complications and overall survival.
Methods
The Protego Maxima Trial was a prospective cohort analysis of patients undergoing major surgery (visceral, thoracic, urology, vascular and gynecologic surgeries) as key inclusion criterion and the absence of an acute or acute on chronically decompensated pulmo-cardiovascular decompensation. Patients were risk-scored with the software (The Prehab App) that includes a battery of evidence-based risk assessment tools that allow a structured risk assessment. The data were grouped to predefined high and low risk groups and aggregate and individual scores. The primary outcome was to validate the predictive value of the RAI score and the TUG for overall survival in the high and low risk groups. Secondary outcomes were surgical outcomes at 90-days after surgery (overall survival, Clavien-Dindo (CD) 1–5 (all complications), and CD 3–5 (major complications)). The study was carried out in accordance with the DIN ISO 14,155, and the medical device regulation (MDR) at Frankfurt University Hospital between March 2022 and January 2023.
Results
In total 267 patients were included in the intention to treat analysis. The mean age was 62.1 ± 12.4 years. Patients with a RAI score > 25 and/or a timed up and go (TUG) > 8 s had a higher risk for mortality at 90 days after surgery. The low-risk group predicted beneficial outcome and the high-risk group predicted adverse outcome in the ROC analysis (Area Under the Curve Receiver Operator Characteristics: AUROC > 0.800; p = 0.01). Risk groups (high vs. low) showed significant differences for 90-day survival (99.4% vs. 95.5%; p = 0.04) and major complications (16.4% vs. 32.4%; p < 0.001).
Conclusion
The proof-of-concept trial showed that a risk assessment with ‘The Prehab App’ may be viable to estimate the preoperative risk for mortality and major complications before major surgeries. The overall performance in this initial set of data indicated a certain reliability of the scoring and risk grouping, especially of the RAI score and the TUG. A larger data set will be required to proof the generalizability of the risk scoring to every subgroup and may be fostered by artificial intelligence approaches.
Trial registration
Ethics number: 2021-483-MDR/MPDG-zuständig monocentric; The Federal Institute for Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices/BfArM, reference number: 94.1.04-5660-13655; Eudamed: CIV-21-07-0307311; German Clinical Trial Registry: DRKS 00026985.
Funder
Johann Wolfgang Goethe-Universität, Frankfurt am Main
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference42 articles.
1. Dencker EE, Bonde A, Troelsen A, Varadarajan KM, Sillesen M. Postoperative complications: an observational study of trends in the United States from 2012 to 2018. BMC Surg November. 2021;21(1):393.
2. Tevis SE, Cobian AG, Truong HP, Craven MW, Kennedy GD. Implications of multiple complications on the postoperative recovery of general surgery patients. Ann Surg Juni. 2016;263(6):1213–8.
3. WHO Guidelines for Safe Surgery. 2009: Safe Surgery Saves Lives [Internet]. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2009 [zitiert 24. März 2024]. (WHO Guidelines Approved by the Guidelines Review Committee). Verfügbar unter: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK143243/.
4. Mayhew D, Mendonca V, Murthy BVS. A review of ASA physical status - historical perspectives and modern developments. Anaesth März. 2019;74(3):373–9.
5. Oken MM, Creech RH, Tormey DC, Horton J, Davis TE, McFadden. ET, u. a. toxicity and response criteria of the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group. Am J Clin Oncol Dezember. 1982;5(6):649–55.
Cited by
1 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献