Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,459

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Prediction of Postoperative Pulmonary Complications in a Population-based Surgical Cohort

Open access
Canet, Jaume, Gallart, Lluís, Gomar, Carmen, Paluzie, Guillem, Vallès, Jordi, Castillo, Jordi, Sabaté, Sergi, Mazo, Valentín, Briones, Zahara, Sanchis, Joaquín·2010·Anesthesiology

Abstract

Background: Current knowledge of the risk for postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs) rests on studies that narrowly selected patients and procedures. Hypothesizing that PPC occurrence could be predicted from a reduced set of perioperative variables, we aimed to develop a predictive index for a broad surgical population. Methods: Patients undergoing surgical procedures given general, neuraxial, or regional anesthesia in 59 hospitals were randomly selected for this prospective, multicenter study. The main outcome was the development of at least one of the following: respiratory infection, respiratory failure, bronchospasm, atelectasis, pleural effusion, pneumothorax, or aspiration pneumonitis. The cohort was randomly divided into a development subsample to construct a logistic regression model and a validation subsample. A PPC predictive index was constructed. Results: Of 2,464 patients studied, 252 events were observed in 123 (5%). Thirty-day mortality was higher in patients with a PPC (19.5%; 95% [CI], 12.5-26.5%) than in those without a PPC (0.5%; 95% CI, 0.2-0.8%). Regression modeling identified seven independent risk factors: low preoperative arterial oxygen saturation, acute respiratory infection during the previous month, age, preoperative anemia, upper abdominal or intrathoracic surgery, surgical duration of at least 2 h, and emergency surgery. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was 90% (95% CI, 85-94%) for the development subsample and 88% (95% CI, 84-93%) for the validation subsample. Conclusion: The risk index based on seven objective, easily assessed factors has excellent discriminative ability. The index can be used to assess individual risk of PPC and focus further research on measures to improve patient care.

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 · 10.1097/aln.0b013e3181fc6e0a

Cites

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 1,459

Metadata

Authors
Canet, J., Gallart, L., Gomar, C., Paluzie, G., Vallès, J., Castillo, J., Sabaté, S., Mazo, V., Briones, Z., & Sanchis, J.
Venue
Anesthesiology
Published
2010-12-01
Volume
113
Issue
6
Pages
1338-1350
ISSN
0003-3022 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2133957981
Cited by
1,459
References
0
FWCI
15.53
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: Prediction of Postoperative Pulmonary Complications in a Population-based Surgical Cohort. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1097/aln.0b013e3181fc6e0a
The paper
Canet, J., Gallart, L., Gomar, C., Paluzie, G., Vallès, J., Castillo, J., Sabaté, S., Mazo, V., Briones, Z., & Sanchis, J. (2010). Prediction of Postoperative Pulmonary Complications in a Population-based Surgical Cohort. Anesthesiology. https://doi.org/10.1097/aln.0b013e3181fc6e0a

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.