Title: Evaluation of Portsmouth POSSUM in predicting the mortality of patients undergoing major abdominal surgeries
Authors: Dr Nirmalkumar. T, Prof. Dr J. Kabalimurthy, Dr Nivash. S, Dr Prema. M, Dr Balamurugan. E, Dr Jayavarmaa. R, Dr Mohan. CP
DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.18535/jmscr/v7i11.08
Abstract
Background: The Physiological and Operative Severity Scoring system for enUmeration of Mortality and morbidity (POSSUM) and its modification, Portsmouth POSSUM scoring system has been proposed as risk adjusted surgical scoring system for standardizing method for the patient data, so as to allow the direct comparison in spite of differing patterns of population and referral patterns(1,2). Application of Portsmouth POSSUM scoring system in developing countries like India especially in under developed areas like Chidambaram where most people belongs to poor socio economic status because of frequent attacks by cyclones, poverty being more since most of local residents are farmers and fisherman and resource availability being less and delayed presentation being more common because most areas being remote to health facilities is limited. Hence the prospective study was taken up to assess the validity of Portsmouth POSSUM scoring system and risk factors responsible for poor outcome.
Methods: 50 cases undergoing major abdominal surgeries in Department of General surgery, Rajah Muthiah Medical College and Hospital, Chidambaram were studied. The expected mortality rate was obtained using the formula. The observed and expected mortality ratio (O: E ratio) was then obtained by dividing the expected number of deaths with observed number of deaths in each category. Chi square test with Yates correction was then applied to obtain the p value to note any significant difference between predicted and actual death. The distribution of both physiological and operative parameters between the two groups dead and alive was obtained by cross tabulation and the pattern was expressed by means of percentages. The distribution was then compared by using Chi-square test to find out any difference between the two groups with respect to the risk factor concerned. In case of continuous variables like Physiological score, operative score and predicted mortality, Independent samples t test have been applied to find out the difference between the two groups.
Results: In our study we assessed the validity of Portsmouth POSSUM in 50 major abdominal surgeries by comparing the observed and expected mortality rate. The predicted mortality was significantly higher among those died than those who were alive. The observed: expected ratio was found to be 1.The physiological score was found to be significantly different between the dead and alive, while the operative score was found to be similar between the two groups in our study. The physiological score was found to influence the outcome more than the operative score in the present study. The above results indicate that the Portsmouth POSSUM scoring system predicts the mortality accurately among the study participants.
Conclusion: The present study suggests that Portsmouth POSSUM is accurate predictor of postoperative mortality in our study population.
Keywords: P-POSSUM, Portsmouth POSSUM, major GI surgeries, mortality, surgical scoring audit.
References
- Copeland GP, Jones D, Walters M. POSSUM: a scoring system for surgical audit. Br J Surg 1991; 78: 355-360.
- Copeland GP. Comparative audit: fact versus fantasy (for debate). Br J Surg 1993;80: 1424-1425
- Copeland GP, Jones DR, Wilcox A, Harris PL. Comparative vascular audit using the POSSUM scoring system. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 1993; 75: 175-177.
- 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.
- Murray GD, Hayes C, Fowler S, Dunn DC. Presentation of comparative audit data. Br J Surg 1995; 82: 329-332.
- Jones HJ de Cossart L. Risk scoring in surgical patients. Br J Surg 1999; 86:149-157.
- Zafirellis KD, Fountoulakis A, Dolan K, Dexter SP, Martin IG, Sue-Ling HM. Evaluation of POSSUM in patients with esophageal cancer undergoing resection. Br J Surg 2002; 89: 1150-1159.
- Yii MK, Ng KJ. Risk-adjusted surgical audit with the POSSUM scoring system in a developing country. Br J Surg 2002; 89: 110-113.
- Prytherch DR, Whiteley MS, Higgins B, Weaver PC, Prout WG, Powell SJ. POSSUM and Portsmouth POSSUM for predicting mortality. Physiological and Operative Severity Score for the enumeration of Mortality and morbidity. Br J Surg 1998; 85: 1217-1220
- Wijesinghe LD, Mahmood T, Scott DJ, Berridge DC, Kent PJ, Kester RC. Comparison of POSSUM and the Portsmouth predictor equation for predicting death following vascular surgery. Br J Surg 1998; 85: 209-212.
- Midwinter MS, Tytherleigh M, Ashley S. Estimation of mortality and morbidity risk in vascular surgery using POSSUM and the Portsmouth predictor equation. Br J Surg 1999; 86: 471-474.
- Whitely MS, Prytherch DR, Higgins B, Weaver PC, Prout WG. An evaluation of the POSSUM surgical system. Br J Surg 1996; 83: 812-815.
- Treharne GD, Thompson MM, Whiteley MS, Bell PRF. Physiological comparison of open and endovascular aneurysm repair. Br J Surg 1999; 86: 760-764.
- Neary B, Whitman B, Foy C, Heather BP, Earnshaw JJ. Value of POSSUM physiology scoring to assess outcome after intra-arterial thrombolysis for acute leg ischemia (short note). Br J Surg 2001; 88: 1344-1345.
- Tekkis PP, Kocher HM, Bentley AJ, Cullen PT, South LM, Trotter GA et al. Operative mortality rates among surgeons: comparison of POSSUM and PPOSSUM scoring systems in gastrointestinal surgery. Dis Colon Rectum 2000; 43: 1528-1532.
- 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: 340-345.
- Sagar PM, Hartley MN, MacFie J, Taylor BA, Copeland GP. Comparison of individual surgeon’s performance. Risk-adjusted analysis with POSSUM scoring system. Dis Colon Rectum 1996; 39: 654-658.