Background High-risk surgical procedures represent a fundamental part of general surgery practice due to its significant rates of morbidity and mortality. Different predictive tools have been created in order to quantify perioperative morbidity and mortality risk. POSSUM (Physiological and Operative Severity Score for the enumeration of Mortality and morbidity) is one of the most widely validated predictive scores considering physiological and operative variables to precisely define morbimortality risk. Nevertheless, seeking greater accuracy in predictions P-POSSUM was proposed. We aimed to compare POSSUM and P-POSSUM for patients undergoing abdominal surgery. Methods A retrospective observational study with a prospective database was conducted. Patients over 18 years old who complied with inclusion criteria between 2015 and 2016 were included. Variables included in the POSSUM and P-POSSUM Scores were analyzed. Descriptive statistics of all study parameters were provided. The analysis included socio-demographic data, laboratory values ​​, and imaging. Bivariate analysis was performed. Results 350 Patients were included in the analysis, 55.1% were female. The mean age was 55.9 ± 20.4 years old. POSSUM revealed a moderated index score in 61.7% of the patients, mean score of 12.85 points ± 5.61. 89.1% of patients had no neoplastic diagnosis associated. Overall morbidity and mortality rate was 14.2% and 7.1%. P-POSSUM could predict more precisely mortality (p < 0.00). Conclusions The POSSUM score is likely to overestimate the risk of morbidity and mortality in patients with high/moderate risk, while the P-POSSUM score seems to be a more accurate predictor of mortality risk. Further studies are needed to confirm our results.

Introduction: The risk of choledocholithiasis should be assessed in every patient undergoing cholecystectomy to define the next step. The American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy proposed a stratified predictor scale of choledocholithiasis. Therefore, we aimed to describe our experience managing patients with an intermediate risk of choledocholithiasis according to the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy guidelines and the actual presence of bile duct stones in magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography. Methods: A retrospective observational study with a prospective database was conducted. The analysis included sociodemographic data, laboratory values, and imaging. Bivariate, multivariate, and receiver operating characteristic analysis were performed. Results: Three hundred twenty-seven patients had an intermediate risk for choledocholithiasis. Half the patients were at least 65 years old. 24.77% were diagnosed with choledocholithiasis. Bile duct dilation was documented in only 3.06% of cases. Diagnosis of choledocholithiasis is associated with an age odds ratio (OR): 1.87 ( P 0.02), alkaline phosphatase OR: 2.44 ( P 0.02), and bile duct dilation greater than 6 mm OR: 14.65 ( P 0.00). Conclusions: High variability in the accuracy of imaging techniques results in a large number of patients classified as intermediate risk without choledocholithiasis in cholangioresonance. Therefore, enhancing the criteria to define intermediate risk for patients in order to optimize resources is of paramount importance.

Background Choledocolithiasis is the presence of stones in the bile duct, commonly associated with cholelithiasis, with an incidence of 5-18%. Risk of choledocolithiasis should be assessed in every patient who must undergo cholecystectomy to define the next step, which can be either surgical or endoscopic. The American Gastroenterology Society (ASGE) proposed a predictor scale of choledocolithiasis based on ultrasound findings, liver function tests, and the presence of pancreatitis and/or cholangitis. Therefore we aim to describe our experience managing patients with intermediate risk of choledocolithiasis according to the ASGE guidelines and actual presence of bile duct stones in magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography. MethodsA retrospective observational study with a prospective database was conducted. Patients over 18 years old who complied with inclusion criteria between January and December 2019, were registered. Descriptive statistics of all study parameters were provided. Analysis included socio demographic data, laboratory values ​​and imaging. Bivariate, multivariate and ROC analysis was performed. Results 327 patients with biliary disease were classified as having intermediate risk for choledocolithiasis. Half the patients were at least 65 years old (iqr 20). All patients underwent MRI cholangiography. 24.77% were diagnosed with choledocolithiasis. Bile duct dilation was documented in only 3.06% of cases. Diagnosis of choledocolithiasis is associated with age OR: 1.87 (p 0.02), alkaline phosphatase OR: 2.44 (p 0.02) and bile duct dilation < 6 mm OR: 14.65 (p 0.00). ConclusionsThere is a high proportion of patients classified as intermediate risk who did not have choledocolithiasis by colangioresonance. There is a persistently high variability in accuracy of imaging techniques in intermediate risk patients. Therefore, enhancing the criteria to define intermediate risk for patients in order to optimize resources is of paramount importance.