Perspectives in Medical Research

Volume: 9 Issue: 2

  • Open Access
  • Original Article

Assessment of morbidity and mortality by P-POSSUM scores in Emergency GI Surgeries

G. Chandra shekhar Goud1, Kale Rajesh2

1. Assistant Professor, Department of General Surgery, Prathima Institute of Medical Sciences, Naganoor, Karimnagar, Telangana State, India.
2. Associate Professor, Department of General Surgery, Prathima Institute of Medical Sciences, Naganoor, Karimnagar, Telangana State, India.
Address for correspondence: Dr. Rajesh Kale, Associate Professor, Department of General Surgery, Prathima Institute of Medical Sciences, Naganoor, Karimnagar, Telangana State, India.
Email: [email protected]

Year: 2021, Page: 19-23, Doi: https://doi.org/10.47799/pimr.0902.05

Received: Jan. 15, 2021 Accepted: Jan. 27, 2021 Published: Jan. 27, 2021

Abstract

Background: Assessment of morbidity and mortality risk in emergency gastrointestinal surgeries is a fairly difficult challenge. To have a better scientific, reliable, and reproducible method of assessment POSSUM and its modified version PPOSSUM scores have been devised. In this study, we tried to evaluate the P-POSSUM Scores in patients undergoing emergency GI surgical procedures.
Methods: This study was done in the Department of General Surgery, PIMS a tertiary care hospital. Consecutive emergency surgical procedures following inclusion and exclusion criteria were selected for the study. A total of n=50 cases were included in the study. P-POSSUM scores were derived for each of the cases and analysis of the predicted morbidity and mortality was compared.
Results: The range of 9.9% risk was done to categorize into 10 different groups with increasing order of scores. The highest frequency was observed in 20.1 – 30.0% which was 22% lower frequency scores were observed in higher extremes. The morbidity risk scores show the highest frequency in 32% in the range of > 90.0 cases followed by 80.1 – 90.0 having cases of 28%.
Conclusion:
P-POSSUM is an accurate and reliable scoring method for assessing morbidity and mortality in emergency Gastrointestinal surgeries. However, it was found to overestimate mortality and morbidity in our patient population. P-POSSUM over-estimates risk for morbidity in lowrisk groups while it accurately predicts the risk in higher-risk groups.

Keywords: P-POSSUM, Emergency GI Surgeries, Morbidity, Mortality

References

1. Yosif SMA, Hamza AA, Mahadi SI. Comparison betweenPOSSUM and P-POSSUM Scores in the prediction of postoperative mortality and morbidity in patientsundergoing emergency laparotomy at Omdurmanteaching hospital. Sch J App Med Sci 2015;3(2B):650-653.
2. Sagar PM, Hartley MN, Mancey-Jones B, Sedman PC, May J, MacFie J. Comparative audit of colorectal resection with the POSSUM scoring system. Br J Surg 1994; 81: 1492- 1494.
3. Copeland GP, Jones DR, Wilcox A, Harris PL. Comparative vascular audit using the POSSUM scoring system. Ann R Coll SurgEngl 1993;75:175-177.
4. Murray GD, Hayes C, Fowler S, Dunn DC. Presentation of comparative audit data. Br J Surg 1995; 82: 329-332.
5. Mundu M, Singh SK, Noor N, et al.Evaluation of mortality and morbidity in emergency gastrointestinal surgeriesusing the p-possum score in RIMS Ranchi. J Evid Based Med Healthc 2020; 7(38):2141-44.
6. Jones HJ, DeCossart L. Risk scoring in surgical patients. Br J Surg 1999;86: 149-157.
7. Bennett-Guerrero E, Hyam JA, Shafi S, Prytherch DR, Sutton GL, Weaver PC, et al. Comparison of P-POSSUM risk-adjusted mortality rates after surgery between patients in the USA and the UK. Br J Surg 2003; 90: 1593- 1598.
8. Lam CM, Fan ST, Yuen AW, Law WL, Poon K. Validation of POSSUM scoring systems for audit of major hepatectomy. Br J Surg 2004; 91: 450-454.
9. Yii MK, Ng KJ. Risk-adjusted surgical audit with the POSSUM scoring system in a developing country. Br J Surg 2002; 89: 110-113.
10. Mohil RS, Bhatnagar D, Bahadur L, Rajaneesh, Dev DK, Magan M. POSSUM and POSSUM for risk-adjusted audit of patients undergoing emergency laparotomy. Br J Surg 2004; 91: 500-03.
11. Wijesinghe LD, Mahmood T, Scott DJ, Berridge DC, Kent PJ, Kester RC. Comparison of POSSUM and the Portsmouth ISSN (P) 2348-1447 ISSN (O) 2338-229X predictor equation for predicting death following vascular surgery. Br J Surg 1998;85:209-12.
12. Tekkis PP, Kessaris N, Kocher HM, Poloniecki JD, Lyttle J, Windsor AC. Evaluation of POSSUM and P-POSSUM in patients undergoing colorectal surgery. Br J Surg 2003; 90: 340-45.
13. Parihar V, Sharma D, Kohli R, Sharma DB. Risk adjustment for audit of low risk general surgical patients by JabalpurPOSSUM score. Indian J Surg 2005; 67: 38-42.
14. Copeland GP, Jones D, Walters M. POSSUM: a scoringsystem for surgical audit. Br J Surg1991;78(3):355- 60.
15. Vallabha T, Pangi M. Assessment of surgical outcome in general surgery using Portsmouth possum scoring. Al Ameen J Med Sci 2013; 6(1):65-69.
16. Mohil RS, Bhatnagar D, Bahadur L, Rajaneesh, Dev DK,Magan M. POSSUM and P-POSSUM for risk-adjusted auditof patients undergoing emergency laparotomy. Br J Surg2004; 91: 500-503.
17. Rana DS, Singh A, Gupta P, SinghV, Bandyopadhyay G. Evaluation of POSSUM Score forOutcome Prediction in Patients Undergoing EmergencyLaparotomy. Ann. Int. Med. Den. Res. 2018; 4(4): SG01-SG05.
18. Copeland GP, Jones D, Wilcox A, et al. Comparativevascular audit using the POSSUM scoring system. AnnR Coll SurgEngl 1993;75(3):175-177.
19. Chieng TH, Roslan AC, Chuah JA. Risk-adjusted analysis ofpatients undergoing laparotomy using POSSUM and PPOSSUM score in Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Sabah. Med JMalaysia. 2010; 65(2):86–90.
20. Kumar S. Comparison of POSSUM and P-POSSUM as audittools in patients undergoing emergency laparotomy forsecondary bacterial peritonitis. Global J Med Res. 2013;13(3): 6-11.
21. Echara M, Singh A, Sharma G. Risk-adjusted analysis ofpatients undergoing emergency laparotomy usingPOSSUM and P-POSSUM score: a prospective study.Niger J Surg 2019;25(1):45-51.

Cite this article

G. Chandra shekhar Goud, Kale Rajesh. Assessment of morbidity and mortality by P-POSSUM scores in Emergency GI Surgeries. Perspectives in Medical Research 2021; 9 (2):19-23 DOI:10.47799/pimr.0902.05

Views
131
Downloads
60
Citations