Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,355

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Mortality after surgery in Europe: a 7 day cohort study

Open access
Pearse, Rupert M, Moreno, Rui P, Bauer, Peter, Pelosi, Paolo, Metnitz, Philipp, Spies, Claudia, Vallet, Benoit, Vincent, Jean-Louis, Hoeft, Andreas, Rhodes, Andrew·2012·The Lancet

Abstract

Summary Background Clinical outcomes after major surgery are poorly described at the national level. Evidence of heterogeneity between hospitals and health-care systems suggests potential to improve care for patients but this potential remains unconfirmed. The European Surgical Outcomes Study was an international study designed to assess outcomes after non-cardiac surgery in Europe. Methods We did this 7 day cohort study between April 4 and April 11, 2011. We collected data describing consecutive patients aged 16 years and older undergoing inpatient non-cardiac surgery in 498 hospitals across 28 European nations. Patients were followed up for a maximum of 60 days. The primary endpoint was in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcome measures were duration of hospital stay and admission to critical care. We used χ2 and Fisher's exact tests to compare categorical variables and the t test or the Mann-Whitney U test to compare continuous variables. Significance was set at p<0·05. We constructed multilevel logistic regression models to adjust for the differences in mortality rates between countries. Findings We included 46 539 patients, of whom 1855 (4%) died before hospital discharge. 3599 (8%) patients were admitted to critical care after surgery with a median length of stay of 1·2 days (IQR 0·9–3·6). 1358 (73%) patients who died were not admitted to critical care at any stage after surgery. Crude mortality rates varied widely between countries (from 1·2% [95% CI 0·0–3·0] for Iceland to 21·5% [16·9–26·2] for Latvia). After adjustment for confounding variables, important differences remained between countries when compared with the UK, the country with the largest dataset (OR range from 0·44 [95% CI 0·19–1·05; p=0·06] for Finland to 6·92 [2·37–20·27; p=0·0004] for Poland). Interpretation The mortality rate for patients undergoing inpatient non-cardiac surgery was higher than anticipated. Variations in mortality between countries suggest the need for national and international strategies to improve care for this group of patients. Funding European Society of Intensive Care Medicine, European Society of Anaesthesiology.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0140-6736(12)61148-9

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 1,355

Metadata

Authors
Pearse, R. M., Moreno, R. P., Bauer, P., Pelosi, P., Metnitz, P., Spies, C., Vallet, B., Vincent, J.-L., Hoeft, A., & Rhodes, A.
Venue
The Lancet
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2012-09
Volume
380
Issue
9847
Pages
1059-1065
ISSN
  • 0099-5355 (ISSN-L)
  • 0140-6736
OpenAlex
W2121499426
Cited by
1,355
References
1
FWCI
49.30
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Mortality after surgery in Europe: a 7 day cohort study. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/s0140-6736(12)61148-9
The paper
Pearse, R. M., Moreno, R. P., Bauer, P., Pelosi, P., Metnitz, P., Spies, C., Vallet, B., Vincent, J.-L., Hoeft, A., & Rhodes, A. (2012). Mortality after surgery in Europe: a 7 day cohort study. The Lancet. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(12)61148-9

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.