Madadi-Sanjani Omid, Brendel Julia, Kuebler Joachim F, Ure Benno M
Department of Pediatric Surgery, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany.
Eur J Pediatr Surg. 2023 Apr;33(2):105-113. doi: 10.1055/s-0043-1760835. Epub 2023 Jan 31.
Severity grading systems for complications in surgical patients have been used since 1992. An increasing assessment of these instruments in pediatric surgery is also noticed, without their validation in children. To analyze the current practice, we performed a literature review with focus on the assessment and grading of complications. The review was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Studies reporting on postoperative complications as a primary or secondary endpoint using a severity grading system were included. Definition for simple adverse events, classification systems used, and the time horizon of postoperative documentation were analyzed. A total of 566 articles were screened, of which 36 met the inclusion criteria. About 86.1% of the papers were retrospective and 13.9% prospective analyses. None of the studies were prospective-randomized trials. Twenty (55.6%) studies did not include a definition of adverse events, whereas the remaining 16 (44.4%) showed variations in their definitions. All studies applied the Clavien-Dindo classification, whereas five (13.9%) additionally used the Comprehensive Complication Index. One study compared alternative grading instruments with the Clavien-Dindo classification, without demonstrating the superiority of any classification in pediatric surgery. Twenty-two studies (61.1%) did not report the time horizon of perioperative complication documentation, while 8 studies (22.2%) used 30 days and 6 studies (16.7%) used 3 months of postoperative documentation. Definition and classification of postoperative complications are inconsistent in the pediatric surgical literature. Establishment of a standardized protocol is mandatory to accurately compare outcome data.
自1992年以来,外科患者并发症的严重程度分级系统就已被使用。在小儿外科领域,对这些工具的评估也越来越多,但它们尚未在儿童中得到验证。为了分析当前的实践情况,我们进行了一项文献综述,重点关注并发症的评估和分级。该综述是根据系统评价和Meta分析的首选报告项目(PRISMA)指南进行的。纳入了使用严重程度分级系统将术后并发症作为主要或次要终点进行报告的研究。分析了简单不良事件的定义、所使用的分类系统以及术后记录的时间范围。共筛选了566篇文章,其中36篇符合纳入标准。约86.1%的论文为回顾性分析,13.9%为前瞻性分析。没有一项研究是前瞻性随机试验。20项(55.6%)研究未包括不良事件的定义,而其余16项(44.4%)研究的定义存在差异。所有研究均采用Clavien-Dindo分类法,而5项(13.9%)研究还额外使用了综合并发症指数。一项研究将替代分级工具与Clavien-Dindo分类法进行了比较,但未证明任何一种分类法在小儿外科中的优越性。22项(61.1%)研究未报告围手术期并发症记录的时间范围,8项(22.2%)研究使用术后30天的数据,6项(16.7%)研究使用术后3个月的数据。小儿外科文献中术后并发症的定义和分类不一致。必须建立标准化方案,以便准确比较结果数据。