Accuracy of Risk Estimation for Surgeons Versus Risk Calculators in Emergency General Surgery.

INTRODUCTION

Surgical risk calculators have expanded in both number and sophistication of their predictive approach. These calculators are gaining popularity as validated tools to help surgeons estimate mortality and complications following emergency general surgery (EGS). However, the accuracy of risk estimates generated by these calculators compared to risk estimation by practicing surgeons has not been explored.

METHODS

Acute care surgeons at a quaternary care center prospectively estimated 30-d mortality and complications for adult EGS patients (2019-2021). Surgeon predictions were compared to Predictive OpTimal Trees in Emergency Surgery Risk (POTTER) and NSQIP estimates. Observed-to-expected (O:E) ratios of median aggregate estimates were calculated. C-statistics for surgeon and calculator estimations were utilized to quantify predictive accuracy.

RESULTS

Among 150 patients (median 61 y, 45% male), 30-d mortality was 15% (n = 23). Observed rates of prolonged mechanical ventilation and acute renal failures were 30% and 10%, respectively. Overall, surgeon predictions were similar to risk calculator estimates for mortality (c-statistics 0.843 [surgeon] versus 0.848 [POTTER] and 0.815 [NSQIP]) and need for prolonged ventilation (c-statistics 0.801 versus 0.722 and 0.689, respectively). Surgeons tended to overestimate complication risks. Surgeon experience was not significantly associated with mortality prediction in an adjusted model.

CONCLUSIONS

Acute care surgeons at a quaternary care center predicted postoperative mortality and complications with similar discrimination when compared to surgical risk calculators. Surgeon expertise should be utilized in conjunction with risk calculators when counseling EGS patients regarding anticipated postoperative outcomes. Surgeons should be cognizant of patterns in overestimation or underestimation of complications.