Display options
Cite
Biro P, Sermeus L, Jankovic R, et al. Basic Features and Clinical Applicability of 'Preliminary Universal Surgical Invasiveness Score' (pUSIS): A Multi-Centre Pilot Study. Turk J Anaesthesiol Reanim. 2017;45(1):9-15doi: 10.5152/TJAR.2017.77785.
Biro, P., Sermeus, L., Jankovic, R., Savić, N., Onuţu, A. H., Ionescu, D., Godoroja, D., & Gurman, G. (2017). Basic Features and Clinical Applicability of 'Preliminary Universal Surgical Invasiveness Score' (pUSIS): A Multi-Centre Pilot Study. Turkish journal of anaesthesiology and reanimation, 45(1), 9-15. https://doi.org/10.5152/TJAR.2017.77785
Biro, Peter, et al. "Basic Features and Clinical Applicability of 'Preliminary Universal Surgical Invasiveness Score' (pUSIS): A Multi-Centre Pilot Study." Turkish journal of anaesthesiology and reanimation vol. 45,1 (2017): 9-15. doi: https://doi.org/10.5152/TJAR.2017.77785
Biro P, Sermeus L, Jankovic R, Savić N, Onuţu AH, Ionescu D, Godoroja D, Gurman G. Basic Features and Clinical Applicability of 'Preliminary Universal Surgical Invasiveness Score' (pUSIS): A Multi-Centre Pilot Study. Turk J Anaesthesiol Reanim. 2017 Feb;45(1):9-15. doi: 10.5152/TJAR.2017.77785. Epub 2017 Feb 01. PMID: 28377835; PMCID: PMC5367732.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

Turk J Anaesthesiol Reanim. 2017 Feb;45(1):9-15. doi: 10.5152/TJAR.2017.77785. Epub 2017 Feb 01.

Basic Features and Clinical Applicability of 'Preliminary Universal Surgical Invasiveness Score' (pUSIS): A Multi-Centre Pilot Study.

Turkish journal of anaesthesiology and reanimation

Peter Biro, Luc Sermeus, Radmilo Jankovic, Nenad Savić, Adela Hilda Onuţu, Daniela Ionescu, Daniela Godoroja, Gabriel Gurman

Affiliations

  1. Institute of Anesthesiology, University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
  2. Department of Anesthesiology, Antwerp University Hospital, Edegem, Belgium.
  3. Department for Anesthesia and Intensive Care, School of Medicine, University of Nis, Nis, Serbia.
  4. Emergency County Hospital Cluj-Napoca, Orthopedic and Trauma Clinic, Anaesthesia and Intensive Care Department, Cluj-Napoca, Romania.
  5. Department of Anesthesia and Intensive Care I, "Iuliu Hatieganu" University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Cluj-Napoca, Romania; Outcomes Research Consortium, Cleveland, Ohio.
  6. Department of Anesthesia, Ponderas Hospital, Centre of Excellence for Bariatric and Metabolic Surgery, University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Bucharest, Romania.
  7. Department of Anesthesiology and Critical Care, Ben Gurion University of the Negev, Beer Sheva, Israel.

PMID: 28377835 PMCID: PMC5367732 DOI: 10.5152/TJAR.2017.77785

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: There is still a lack of a universally applicable and comprehensive scoring system for documenting the invasiveness of surgical procedures. The proposed preliminary 'Universal Surgical Invasiveness Score' (pUSIS) is intended to fill this gap.

METHODS: We used the recently developed pUSIS to obtain values from 8 types of surgery and 80 individual interventions. The results were analysed using descriptive statistical methods. The degree of difficulty on a scale from 0 (very easy) to 10 (extremely difficult) and time expenditures for assessing pUSIS were documented.

RESULTS: Individual pUSIS values ranged from 8 in a laparoscopic cholecystectomy case to 36 in a total hip replacement case. The lowest median pUSIS value of 11.5 was found for laparoscopic cholecystectomy and the highest value of 24.5 was found for open thoracic surgery. The correlation between pUSIS values and the duration of surgery resulted in a tight linear regression (R2=0.6419). The lowest mean (±SD) difficulty level to obtain pUSIS values was 1.6±0.6 for sleeve gastrectomy and the highest one was 2.9±0.6 for knee replacement. The duration to finalise the calculations was 4.1±1.1 min for video-assisted thoracoscopy (VATS) and 9.4±1.3 min for sleeve gastrectomy.

CONCLUSION: We concluded that pUSIS has the potential to be a useful, simply obtainable and universal assessment tool for quantification of the magnitude and invasiveness of individual surgical operations and can serve as a means to quantify surgical interventions for outcome research and evaluate surgical performance.

Keywords: Surgical invasiveness; outcome; score; surgical risk

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of Interest: No conflict of interest was declared by the authors.

References

  1. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2008 Nov 15;33(24):2651-61; discussion 2662 - PubMed
  2. Br J Anaesth. 2014 May;112(5):951-3 - PubMed
  3. Ann Surg. 2004 Apr;239(4):475-82 - PubMed
  4. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2008 Sep;52(8):1038-45 - PubMed
  5. Br J Anaesth. 2007 Apr;98(4):456-61 - PubMed
  6. Arch Surg. 2009 Jan;144(1):30-6; discussion 37 - PubMed
  7. Br J Surg. 2014 Dec;101(13):1774-83 - PubMed
  8. Ann Surg. 2008 Aug;248(2):320-8 - PubMed
  9. Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 1994 Nov;76(6 Suppl):277-8 - PubMed
  10. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2006 Jun 20;7:53 - PubMed
  11. N Engl J Med. 2013 Oct 10;369(15):1434-42 - PubMed
  12. Br J Anaesth. 2007 Apr;98(4):447-55 - PubMed
  13. Br J Anaesth. 2007 Sep;99(3):359-67 - PubMed

Publication Types