External validation and revision of Penn incisional hernia prediction model: A large-scale retrospective cohort of abdominal operations
8
Issued Date
2023-01-01
Resource Type
ISSN
1479666X
Scopus ID
2-s2.0-85166748865
Journal Title
Surgeon
Rights Holder(s)
SCOPUS
Bibliographic Citation
Surgeon (2023)
Suggested Citation
Tansawet A., Numthavaj P., Teza H., Pattanateepapon A., Piebpien P., Poprom N., Techapongsatorn S., McKay G., Attia J., Sumritpradit P., Thakkinstian A. External validation and revision of Penn incisional hernia prediction model: A large-scale retrospective cohort of abdominal operations. Surgeon (2023). doi:10.1016/j.surge.2023.07.008 Retrieved from: https://repository.li.mahidol.ac.th/handle/123456789/88333
Title
External validation and revision of Penn incisional hernia prediction model: A large-scale retrospective cohort of abdominal operations
Other Contributor(s)
Abstract
Background: Incisional hernia (IH) manifests in 10%–15% of abdominal surgeries and patients at elevated risk of this complication should be identified for prophylactic intervention. This study aimed to externally validate the Penn hernia risk calculator. Methods: The Ramathibodi abdominal surgery cohort was constructed by linking relevant hospital databases from 2010 to 2021. Penn hernia risk scores were calculated according to the original model which was externally validated using a seven-step approach. An updated model which included four additional predictor variables (i.e., age, immunosuppressive medication, ostomy reversal, and transfusion) added to those of the three original predictors (i.e., body mass index, chronic liver disease, and open surgery) was also evaluated. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) was estimated, and calibration performance was compared using the Hosmer–Lemeshow goodness-of-fit method for the observed/expected (O/E) ratio. Results: A total of 12,155 abdominal operations were assessed. The original Penn model yielded fair discrimination with an AUC (95% confidence interval (CI)) of 0.645 (0.607, 0.683). The updated model that included the additional predictor variables achieved an acceptable AUC (95% CI) of 0.733 (0.698, 0.768) with the O/E ratio of 0.968 (0.848, 1.088). Conclusion: The updated model achieved improved discrimination and calibration performance, and should be considered for the identification of high-risk patients for further hernia prevention strategy.