Elective and emergency abdominal surgery in patients 90 years of age or older
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Few studies have examined perioperative outcomes in nonagenarians undergoing abdominal surgery, and fewer have reported on 1-year mortality. Our objectives were to determine the outcomes of abdominal surgery in nonagenarians and to assess the performance of Physiologic and Operative Severity Score for enUmeration of Mortality and morbidity (POSSUM) and Portsmouth-POSSUM (p- POSSUM) as predictors of mortality. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective chart review of all patients 90 years and older who underwent abdominal surgery between 2000 and 2007 at a tertiary care hospital. RESULTS: We included 145 patients (median age 91, range 90-101 yr). The most common diagnoses were colorectal cancer (19.3%) and hernias (19.3%), and the most common procedures were bowel resection with anastomosis (25.5%) and hernia repair (18.6%). Overall in-hospital mortality was 15.2% (20.8% in the emergent group and 9.6% in the elective group; p = 0.06). The 1-year mortality (49.1% v. 27.8%; p = 0.016), complication (81.9% v. 61.6%; p = 0.007) and intensive care unit admission rates (44.4% v. 11.0%; p < 0.001) were significantly higher among emergent than elective surgical patients. The operative indications and procedures associated with the highest in-hospital mortality were large bowel obstruction (42.3%) and bowel resection with anastomosis (27.0%). Both the POSSUM and p-POSSUM scoring systems significantly overpredicted mortality, particularly in higher risk groups. CONCLUSION: Nonagenarians undergoing abdominal surgery have substantial operative morbidity and mortality, particularly in emergent surgical cases. Nearly 50% of patients who undergo emergency procedures die within 1 year after surgery. The POSSUM and p-POSSUM scoring systems were not reliable predictors of in-hospital mortality.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".