BackgroundExisting risk stratification tools have limitations and clinical experience suggests they are not used routinely. The aim of this study was to develop and validate a preoperative risk stratification tool to predict 30-day mortality after non-cardiac surgery in adults by analysis of data from the observational National Confidential Enquiry into Patient Outcome and Death (NCEPOD) Knowing the Risk study.MethodsThe data set was split into derivation and validation cohorts. Logistic regression was used to construct a model in the derivation cohort to create the Surgical Outcome Risk Tool (SORT), which was tested in the validation cohort.ResultsProspective data for 19 097 cases in 326 hospitals were obtained from the NCEPOD study. Following exclusion of 2309, details of 16 788 patients were analysed (derivation cohort 11 219, validation cohort 5569). A model of 45 risk factors was refined on repeated regression analyses to develop a model comprising six variables: American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status (ASA-PS) grade, urgency of surgery (expedited, urgent, immediate), high-risk surgical specialty (gastrointestinal, thoracic, vascular), surgical severity (from minor to complex major), cancer and age 65 years or over. In the validation cohort, the SORT was well calibrated and demonstrated better discrimination than the ASA-PS and Surgical Risk Scale; areas under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve were 0·91 (95 per cent c.i. 0·88 to 0·94), 0·87 (0·84 to 0·91) and 0·88 (0·84 to 0·92) respectively (P < 0·001).ConclusionThe SORT allows rapid and simple data entry of six preoperative variables, and provides a percentage mortality risk for individuals undergoing surgery.

Pain control is an integral part of Enhanced Recovery after Surgery (ERAS) protocols for colorectal surgery. While opioid therapy remains the mainstay of therapy for postsurgical pain, opioids have undesired side effects including delayed recovery of bowel function, respiratory depression, and postoperative nausea and vomiting. A variety of nonopioid systemic medical therapies as well as regional and neuraxial techniques have been described as improving pain control while reducing opioid use. Multimodal and preemptive analgesia as part of an ERAS protocol facilitates early mobility and early return of bowel function and decreases postoperative morbidity. In this review, we examine several multimodal therapies and their impact on postoperative analgesia, opioid use, and recovery for patients undergoing colorectal surgery.

This study is the largest assessment of the relationship between Enhanced Recovery protocol compliance and outcome in four surgical specialties. The data suggest that higher compliance with an Enhanced Recovery protocol has a weak association with shorter length of stay. This suggests that changes in process, resulting from highly protocolised pathways, may be as important in reducing perioperative length of stay as any individual element of Enhanced Recovery protocols in isolation.

High-risk, noncardiac surgery represents only 12.5% of surgical procedures, but 83.3% of deaths. The postanaesthetic care unit (PACU) addresses the need for an improved level of care for these patients by providing postoperative high-dependency or intensive care (Level 2 or 3). The PACU aims to improve the structure of care provision for high-risk surgical patients. By maintaining 24-hour cover at the same staffing level, the risk of poorer ‘out-of- hours’ care is reduced. In a PACU, whose remit is solely postoperative care, evidence-based protocols can be established to standardize the care given. The aim is to provide 24 hours of postoperative optimized care, thus targeting the period when these patients are most vulnerable, to reduce the risk of complications developing and identify complications promptly, should they occur. The PACU is set up to facilitate certain processes to aid optimized care in the postoperative period. These include invasive and noninvasive ventilation, goal-directed haemodynamic management, invasive monitoring and optimal pain management. Identification of high-risk patients who might benefit from PACU care is not always straightforward. However, tools are available to aid the clinician, supplementing clinical assessment and basic investigations. These include clinical prediction rules and cardiopulmonary exercise testing. Both the setting up and the running of a PACU clearly have cost implications. However, the reduction in postoperative morbidity, and thus patients’ length of stay, should, overall, reduce costs. The benefits of a PACU should therefore be seen in terms of improved surgical outcomes, reducing postoperative morbidity and mortality, and cost savings.

No abstract

Cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) is an objective method of evaluating integrated cardiopulmonary function. Increasingly, it is being used for perioperative risk assessment. This survey was performed between October and December 2008 to identify where and how CPET is being used for perioperative risk assessment in England. Direct telephone contact was made with the Department of Anaesthesia in 154/173 (89%) of NHS Trusts in England in order to ascertain the availability of a CPET service. One hundred and fifteen (66%) Trusts confirmed whether or not they have a CPET service −30 (17%) Trusts have a CPET service and 12 (7%) are in the process of setting one up. These Trusts were sent a nine-question survey, which was completed by 15 Trusts. Criteria for selecting patients for CPET testing included type of surgery, age and co-morbidities. All trusts use anaerobic threshold (AT) values to identify patients at risk of adverse outcome, though many also used additional variables including peak oxygen consumption, ventilatory equivalents for carbon dioxide, ventilatory equivalents for oxygen, oxygen pulse, oxygen consumption/power slope and breathing reserve. Different numerical threshold values were used in different centres. Patients identified as high risk were managed in a variety of ways, including referral for specialist advice, modifying or cancelling surgery, modified perioperative care and augmented postoperative care (in a level 2 or 3 environment). This survey clearly highlights significant inconsistency in the use of CPET for perioperative risk assessment and suggests that some standardisation of practice may be of value.