The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) provides risk estimates of postoperative complications. While several studies have examined the accuracy of the ACS-Surgical Risk Calculator (SRC) within a single specialty, the respective conclusions are limited by sample size. We sought to conduct a meta-analysis to determine the accuracy of the ACS-SRC among various surgical specialties. Clinical studies that utilized the ACS-SRC, predicted complication rates compared to actual rates, and analyzed at least one metric reported by ACS-SRC met the inclusion criteria. Data for each specialty were pooled using the DerSimonian and Laird random-effect models and analyzed with the binary random-effect model to produce risk difference (RD) and 95 % confidence intervals (CIs) using Open Meta[Analyst]. The initial search yielded 281 studies and, after applying inclusion and exclusion criteria, a total of 53 studies remained with a total sample of 30,134 patients spanning 10 surgical specialties. When considering any complication and death, the ACS-SRC significantly underpredicted complications for: Orthopaedic Surgery (RD -0.067, p = 0.008), Spine (RD -0.027, p < 0.001), Urology (RD -0.03, p < 0.001), Surgical Oncology (RD -0.045, p < 0.001), and Gynecology (RD -0.098, p = 0.01). The ACS-SRC proved useful in General, Acute Care, Colorectal, Otolaryngology, and Cardiothoracic Surgery, but significantly underpredicted complication rates in Spine, Orthopaedics, Urology, Surgical Oncology, and Gynecology. These data indicate the ACS-SRC is a reliable predictor in some specialties, but its use should be cautioned in the remaining specialties evaluated here.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Goodwin et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: