4.3 Article

Risk factors for postoperative pneumonia after general and digestive surgery: a retrospective single-center study

Journal

SURGERY TODAY
Volume 50, Issue 5, Pages 460-468

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00595-019-01911-9

Keywords

Postoperative pneumonia; Risk factors; General and digestive surgery; Malnutrition

Categories

Funding

  1. JSPS KAKENHI [JP90808437]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose Pneumonia is the second-most common complication in postoperative patients and is associated with significant morbidity and high costs of care. We aimed to determine the risk factors for pneumonia after general and digestive surgery. Methods The medical records of 1,016 patients who underwent general and digestive surgery between January 2016 and March 2019 in our hospital were reviewed. Results Of the 1,016 patients, 67 (6.6%) developed postoperative pneumonia. The multivariate analysis showed that significant predictors of postoperative pneumonia were a poor Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG-PS), low forced vital capacity and low forced expiratory volume in one second in the spirometry test, malnutrition (low serum albumin levels and low controlling nutritional status scores and prognostic nutritional index [PNI] values), esophagectomy, upper gastrointestinal surgery, and nonlaparoscopic surgery. Of these factors, the combination of PNI and ECOG-PS clearly stratified patients into low-, intermediate-, and high-risk groups with respect to developing postoperative pneumonia (area under the curve: 0.709). Conclusions Although postoperative pneumonia is associated with many clinical variables, active medical intervention for the prevention of pneumonia in patients with multiple risk factors can improve the postoperative course. In particular, perioperative nutritional care may prevent postoperative pneumonia in patients with malnutrition and a poor PS.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available