↓ Skip to main content

Intraoperative Adverse Events in Abdominal Surgery

Overview of attention for article published in Annals of Surgery, June 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (96th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (91st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
104 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages
video
1 YouTube creator
podcasts
1 podcast

Readers on

mendeley
83 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Article details
Title
Intraoperative Adverse Events in Abdominal Surgery
Published in
Annals of Surgery, June 2017
DOI 10.1097/sla.0000000000001906
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

We sought to assess the impact of intraoperative adverse events (iAEs) on 30-day postoperative mortality, 30-day postoperative morbidity, and postoperative length of stay (LOS) among patients undergoing abdominal surgery. We hypothesized that iAEs would be associated with significant increases in each outcome. The relationship between iAEs and postoperative clinical outcomes remains largely unknown. The 2007 to 2012 institutional ACS-NSQIP and administrative databases for abdominal surgeries were matched then screened for iAEs using the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality's 15 Patient Safety Indicator, "Accidental Puncture/Laceration". Each chart flagged during the initial screen was then manually reviewed to confirm whether an iAE occurred. Univariate then multivariable logistic regression models were constructed to assess the independent impact of iAEs on 30-day mortality, 30-day morbidity, and prolonged (≥7 days) postoperative LOS, controlling for preoperative/intraoperative variables (eg, age, comorbidities, ASA, wound classification), procedure type (eg, laparoscopic vs open, intestinal, foregut, hepatopancreaticobiliary vs abdominal wall procedure), and complexity (eg, adhesions; relative value units). Propensity score analyses were conducted with each iAE patient matched with 5 non-iAE patients. Sensitivity analyses were performed. A total of 9288 cases were included; 183 had iAEs. Most iAEs consisted of bowel (44%) or vessel (29%) injuries and were addressed intraoperatively (92%). In multivariable analyses, iAEs were independently associated with increased 30-day mortality [OR = 3.19, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.52-6.71, P = 0.002], 30-day morbidity (OR = 2.68, 95% CI 1.89-3.81, P < 0.001), and prolonged postoperative LOS (OR = 1.85, 95% CI 1.27-2.70, P = 0.001). Postoperative complications associated with iAEs included deep/organ-space surgical site infection (OR = 1.94, 95% CI 1.20-3.14), P = 0.007), sepsis (OR = 2.14, 95% CI 1.32-3.47, P = 0.002), pneumonia (OR = 2.18, 95% CI 1.11-4.26, P = 0.023), and failure to wean ventilator (OR = 3.88, 95% CI 2.17-6.95, P < 0.001). Propensity score matching confirmed these findings, as did multiple sensitivity analyses. iAEs are independently associated with substantial increases in postoperative mortality, morbidity, and prolonged LOS. Quality improvement efforts should focus on iAE prevention, mitigation of harm after iAEs occur, and risk/severity-adjusted iAE tracking and benchmarking.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 104 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 83 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 83 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 10 12%
Student > Master 8 10%
Researcher 8 10%
Student > Bachelor 5 6%
Professor 4 5%
Other 13 16%
Unknown 35 42%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 29 35%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 6%
Business, Management and Accounting 3 4%
Social Sciences 3 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 2%
Other 5 6%
Unknown 36 43%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 69. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 11 September 2025.
All research outputs
#781,584
of 34,332,182 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Surgery
#338
of 11,576 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#12,005
of 365,217 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Surgery
#11
of 123 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,332,182 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,576 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 365,217 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 123 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.