Dataset Information

Does preoperative American Society of Anesthesiologists score relate to complications after total shoulder arthroplasty?

ABSTRACT:

Background

For hip and knee arthroplasties, an American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score greater than 2 is associated with an increased risk of medical and surgical complications. No study, to our knowledge, has evaluated this relationship for total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) or reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (reverse TSA).

Questions/purposes

We aimed to assess the relationship between the ASA score and (1) surgical complications, (2) medical complications, and (3) hospitalization length after TSA, reverse TSA, and revision arthroplasty.

Methods

We retrospectively analyzed all patients who had undergone TSAs, reverse TSAs, or revision arthroplasties by the senior author (EGM) from November 1999 through July 2011 who had at least 6 months' followup. Of the 485 procedures, 452 (93.2%) met the inclusion criteria. Data were collected on patient demographics, comorbidities, hospitalization length, and short-term (? 6 months) medical and surgical complications. Logistic regression analysis modeled the risk of having postoperative complications develop as a function of the ASA score.

Results

Patients with an ASA score greater than 2 had a greater risk of having a surgical complication develop (p < 0.001; OR, 2.27; 95% CI, 1.36-3.70) and three times the risk of prosthesis failure (ie, component dislocation, component loosening, and hardware failure) (p < 0.001; OR, 3.23; 95% CI, 1.54-6.67). Higher ASA scores were associated with prolonged length of hospitalization (effect size 0.46, p < 0.001), but not medical complications.

Conclusions

ASA score is associated with surgical, but not medical, complications after TSA and reverse TSA. The ASA score could be used for risk assessment and preoperative counseling.

Level of evidence

Level III, therapeutic study. See the Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

SUBMITTER: Johnson CC

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3971223 | biostudies-literature | 2014 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background:With an increasing volume of primary total shoulder arthroplasties (TSA), the number of revision TSA cases is expected to increase as well. However, the postoperative medical morbidity of revision TSA has not been clearly described. Questions/Purposes:The purpose of this study was to determine the rate of postoperative complications following revision TSA, relative to primary TSA. In addition, we sought to identify independent predictors of complications, as well as to compare operative time and postoperative length of stay between primary and revision TSA. Methods:Patients who underwent primary/revision TSA between 2005 and 2015 were identified in the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program. Differences in complications, readmission rates, operative time, length of stay, and predictors of complications were evaluated using bivariate and multivariate analyses. Results:A total of 10,371 primary TSA (95.4%) and 496 revision TSA cases (4.6%) were identified. The overall complication rate was 6.5% in primary and 10.7% in revision TSA patients (p < 0.001). Multivariate analysis identified an increased risk of any complication (odds ratio 1.73, p < 0.001), major complication (2.08, p = 0.001), and wound infection (3.45, p = 0.001) in revision TSA patients, relative to primary cases. Operative time was increased in revision cases (mean ± standard deviation, 125 ± 62.5), relative to primary (115 ± 47.7, p < 0.001). Age > 75, female sex, history of diabetes or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and American Society of Anesthesiologists classification ? 3 were associated with increased risk of any complication. Smoking history was the only significant predictor of wound infection. Conclusion:Revision TSA, in comparison to primary, poses an increased risk of postoperative complications, particularly wound infections. A history of smoking was an independent predictor of wound infections.

Project description:BackgroundElectronic health records (EHR) contain large volumes of unstructured free-form text notes that richly describe a patient's health and medical comorbidities. It is unclear if perioperative risk stratification can be performed directly from these notes without manual data extraction. We conduct a feasibility study using natural language processing (NLP) to predict the American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status Classification (ASA-PS) as a surrogate measure for perioperative risk. We explore prediction performance using four different model types and compare the use of different note sections versus the whole note. We use Shapley values to explain model predictions and analyze disagreement between model and human anesthesiologist predictions.MethodsSingle-center retrospective cohort analysis of EHR notes from patients undergoing procedures with anesthesia care spanning all procedural specialties during a 5 year period who were not assigned ASA VI and also had a preoperative evaluation note filed within 90 days prior to the procedure. NLP models were trained for each combination of 4 models and 8 text snippets from notes. Model performance was compared using area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) and area under the precision recall curve (AUPRC). Shapley values were used to explain model predictions. Error analysis and model explanation using Shapley values was conducted for the best performing model.ResultsFinal dataset includes 38,566 patients undergoing 61,503 procedures with anesthesia care. Prevalence of ASA-PS was 8.81% for ASA I, 31.4% for ASA II, 43.25% for ASA III, and 16.54% for ASA IV-V. The best performing models were the BioClinicalBERT model on the truncated note task (macro-average AUROC 0.845) and the fastText model on the full note task (macro-average AUROC 0.865). Shapley values reveal human-interpretable model predictions. Error analysis reveals that some original ASA-PS assignments may be incorrect and the model is making a reasonable prediction in these cases.ConclusionsText classification models can accurately predict a patient's illness severity using only free-form text descriptions of patients without any manual data extraction. They can be an additional patient safety tool in the perioperative setting and reduce manual chart review for medical billing. Shapley feature attributions produce explanations that logically support model predictions and are understandable to clinicians.

Project description:To compare patient self-report of knee flexion, extension, range of motion (ROM) and American Knee Society (AKS) Pain, Knee and Functional scores with a clinician assessment.A total of 239 consecutive total knee arthroplasty (TKA) patients (290 knees) were mailed surveys with an AKS questionnaire and lateral knee photographs that showed knee ROM in 10 degrees increments to compare their operated knee(s) ROM. Patients were subsequently seen in clinic and their ROM, AKS Pain, Knee and Functional scores were measured. Patient- and physician-reported measures were compared using independent sample t-test and correlated using Spearman's correlation coefficient. A priori rules for comparisons were based on previously published reports.A total of 286 knees had both survey and clinic data available and constituted the analytic set. Patient-reported and physician-assessed extension, flexion and ROM were: 3 +/- 4.8 degrees vs 1.4 +/- 4.3 degrees (P < 0.001), 111.4 +/- 14.6 degrees vs 110 +/- 12.8 degrees (P = 0.04) and 108.6 +/- 16.8 vs 108.6 +/- 14.3 degrees (P = 0.98). There was a moderate correlation between patient and physician assessments (extension = 0.31; flexion = 0.44; ROM = 0.42; P < or = 0.001 for all). Patient-reported and physician-assessed AKS Pain, Knee and Functional scores were: 35.8 +/- 15.6 vs 43.9 +/- 11.1 (P < 0.001), 79.8 +/- 20 vs 88.9 +/- 13.3 (P < 0.001) and 57.7 +/- 23.1 vs 65.7 +/- 26.4 (P < 0.001), respectively. Patient- and physician-assessed AKS Pain, Knee and Functional scores had moderate-high correlation (r = 0.49, 0.49 and 0.70; P < or = 0.001 for all).Long-term surveillance of TKA patients may be possible using a self-report AKS, but the average 8- to 10-point difference between patient- and physician-reported AKS scores (patients reporting poorer scores) represents a substantial impact on this outcome instrument. Since patient-reported responses have clear value in global assessment, further evaluation with other validated outcome instruments is warranted.

Project description:BackgroundAseptic loosening of glenoid implants is the primary revision cause in anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty (aTSA). While supported by biomechanical studies, the impact of glenoid bone quality, more specifically bone mineral density (BMD), on aseptic glenoid loosening remains unclear. We hypothesized that lower preoperative glenoid BMD was associated with aseptic glenoid implant loosening in aTSA.MethodsWe retrospectively included 93 patients (69 females and 24 males; mean age, 69.2 years) who underwent preoperative non-arthrographic shoulder computed tomography (CT) scans and aTSA between 2002 and 2014. Preoperative glenoid BMD (CT numbers in Hounsfield unit) was measured in 3D using a reliable semi-automated quantitative method, in the following six contiguous volumes of interest (VOI): cortical, subchondral cortical plate (SC), subchondral trabecular, and three successive adjacent layers of trabecular bone. Univariate Cox regression was used to estimate the impact of preoperative glenoid BMD on aseptic glenoid implant loosening. We further compared 26 aseptic glenoid loosening patients with 56 matched control patients.ResultsGlenoid implant survival rates were 89% (95% confidence interval CI, 81-96%) and 57% (41-74%) at 5 and 10 years, respectively. Hazard ratios for the different glenoid VOIs ranged between 0.998 and 1.004 (95% CI [0.996, 1.007], p≥0.121). Only the SC VOI showed significantly lower CTn in the loosening group (622±104 HU) compared with the control group (658±88 HU) (p=0.048), though with a medium effect size (d=0.42). There were no significant differences in preoperative glenoid BMD in any other VOI between patients from the loosening and control groups.ConclusionsAlthough the preoperative glenoid BMD was statistically significantly lower in the SC region of patients with aseptic glenoid implant loosening compared with controls, this single-VOI difference was only moderate. We are thus unable to prove that lower preoperative glenoid BMD is clearly associated with aseptic glenoid implant loosening in aTSA. However, due to its proven biomechanical role in glenoid implant survival, we recommend extending this study to larger CT datasets to further assess and better understand the impact of preoperative glenoid BMD on glenoid implant loosening/survival and aTSA outcome.