Reporting and Grading of Complications After Urologic Surgical Procedures: An ad hoc EAU Guidelines Panel Assessment and Recommendations
Reporting and Grading of Complications After Urologic Surgical Procedures: An ad hoc EAU Guidelines Panel Assessment and Recommendations
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.eururo.2011.10.033
复制
发表时间：
2012-02-01
期刊：
影响因子：
23.4
通讯作者：
Truss, Michael
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Mitropoulos, Dionysios;Artibani, Walter;Truss, Michael
内容：术后并发症的发生率仍然是手术质量最常用的替代指标，但在泌尿外科领域没有标准指南或标准用于报告手术并发症。目的：回顾泌尿外科手术并发症的可用报告系统，确定使用标准化系统报告并发症的态度可能发生的变化，系统地评估Clavien-Dindo系统用于报告泌尿外科手术相关并发症时的情况，识别并发症报告中的不足，并为未来开发和实施以患者为中心的结局报告系统提出建议。证据采集：通过对文献的系统回顾，确定了手术并发症报告和分类的标准化系统。为了确定对报告泌尿外科手术相关并发症的态度可能发生的变化，我们对1999-2000年和2009-2010年发表在《欧洲泌尿外科》、《泌尿外科杂志》、《泌尿外科》、《北京大学国际版》和《世界泌尿外科杂志》上的所有报告泌尿外科手术后并发症的论文进行了系统的文献检索。目前用于报告泌尿外科手术相关并发症的Clavien-Dindo系统的系统评估的数据识别涉及Medline/Embase检索以及使用Clavien、泌尿学和并发症作为关键词的各个泌尿学期刊和出版商的搜索引擎。所有选定的文件进行全文检索和评估，分析是基于结构化的forms.Evidence合成：用于报告和分类手术并发症的标准化系统的文献的系统性综述，揭示了五个这样的系统。就泌尿科医生对并发症报告的态度而言，使用大多数Martin标准的研究数量以及使用标准化标准或Clavien-Dindo系统的研究数量都发生了变化。后一种系统没有正确使用72篇论文（35.3%）。结论：泌尿外科手术后并发症的统一报告将有助于所有参与患者护理和科学出版（作者，评审员和编辑）。这也将有助于提高泌尿外科领域发表论文的科学质量。在报告泌尿外科手术的结果时，委员会提出了一系列质量标准。(C)2011年欧洲泌尿外科协会。由Elsevier B出版。V.保留所有权利。
Context: The incidence of postoperative complications is still the most frequently used surrogate marker of quality in surgery, but no standard guidelines or criteria exist for reporting surgical complications in the area of urology.Objective: To review the available reporting systems used for urologic surgical complications, to establish a possible change in attitude towards reporting of complications using standardised systems, to assess systematically the Clavien-Dindo system when used for the reporting of complications related to urologic surgical procedures, to identify shortcomings in reporting complications, and to propose recommendations for the development and implementation of future reporting systems that are focused on patient-centred outcomes.Evidence acquisition: Standardised systems for reporting and classification of surgical complications were identified through a systematic review of the literature. To establish a possible change in attitude towards reporting of complications related to urologic procedures, we performed a systematic literature search of all papers reporting complications after urologic surgery published in European Urology, Journal of Urology, Urology, BJU International, and World Journal of Urology in 1999-2000 and 2009-2010. Data identification for the systematic assessment of the Clavien-Dindo system currently used for the reporting of complications related to urologic surgical interventions involved a Medline/Embase search and the search engines of individual urologic journals and publishers using Clavien, urology, and complications as keywords. All selected papers were full-text retrieved and assessed; analysis was done based on structured forms.Evidence synthesis: The systematic review of the literature for standardised systems used for reporting and classification of surgical complications revealed five such systems. As far as the attitude of urologists towards reporting of complications, a shift could be seen in the number of studies using most of the Martin criteria, as well as in the number of studies using either standardised criteria or the Clavien-Dindo system. The latter system was not properly used in 72 papers (35.3%).Conclusions: Uniformed reporting of complications after urologic procedures will aid all those involved in patient care and scientific publishing (authors, reviewers, and editors). It will also contribute to the improvement of the scientific quality of papers published in the field of urologic surgery. When reporting the outcomes of urologic procedures, the committee proposes a series of quality criteria. (C) 2011 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B. V. All rights reserved.