The DOI matches its Crossref record.
The Accordion Severity Grading System of Surgical Complications
Abstract
BACKGROUND: A severity grading system is essential to reporting surgical complications. In 1992, we presented such a system (T92). Its use and that of systems derived from it have increased exponentially. Our purpose was to determine how well T92 and its modifications have functioned as a severity grading system and to develop an improved system for reporting complications. METHODS: 129 articles were studied in detail. Twenty variables were searched for in each article with particular emphasis on type of study, substitution of qualitative terms for grades, grade compression, and cut-points if grade compression was used. We also determined relative distribution of complications and manner of presentation of complications. RESULTS: T92 and derivative classifications have received wide use in surgical studies ranging from small studies with few complications to large studies of complex operations that describe many complications. There is a strong tendency to contract classifications and to substitute terms with self evident meaning for the numerical grades. Complications are presented in a large variety of tabular forms some of which are much easier to follow than others. CONCLUSIONS: Current methods for reporting the severity of complications incompletely fulfill the needs of authors of surgical studies. A new system-the Accordion Severity Grading System-is presented. The Accordion system can be used more readily for small as well as large studies. It introduces standard definition of simple quantitative terms and presents a standard tabular reporting system. This system should bring the field closer to a common severity grading method for surgical complications.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
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.
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
Effect of a comprehensive surgical safety system on patient outcomes
de Vries, E. N., Prins, H. A., Crolla, R. M. P. H., den Outer, A. J., van Andel, G., van Helden, S. H., Schlack, W. S., van Putten, M. A., Gouma, D. J., Dijkgraaf, M. G. W., et al. (2010) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmsa0911535 · Cited by 998
Filippiadis, D. K., Binkert, C., Pellerin, O., Hoffmann, R. T., Krajina, A., & Pereira, P. L. (2017) · CardioVascular and Interventional Radiology · doi:10.1007/s00270-017-1703-4 · Cited by 720
Effect of Delirium and Other Major Complications on Outcomes After Elective Surgery in Older Adults
Gleason, L. J., Schmitt, E. M., Kosar, C. M., Tabloski, P., Saczynski, J. S., Robinson, T., Cooper, Z., Rogers, S. O., Jones, R. N., Marcantonio, E. R., et al. (2015) · JAMA Surgery · doi:10.1001/jamasurg.2015.2606 · Cited by 553
Simple frailty score predicts postoperative complications across surgical specialties
Robinson, T. N., Wu, D. S., Pointer, L., Dunn, C. L., Cleveland, J. C., & Moss, M. (2013) · The American Journal of Surgery · doi:10.1016/j.amjsurg.2013.03.012 · Cited by 513
Asbun, H. J., & Stauffer, J. A. (2012) · Journal of the American College of Surgeons · doi:10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2012.08.006 · Cited by 395
Metadata
- Authors
- Strasberg, S. M., Linehan, D. C., & Hawkins, W. G.
- Venue
- Annals of Surgery
- Published
- 2009-08
- Volume
- 250
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 177-186
- ISSN
- 0003-4932 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1969728666
- Cited by
- 679
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 12.26
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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: The Accordion Severity Grading System of Surgical Complications. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1097/sla.0b013e3181afde41
- The paper
- Strasberg, S. M., Linehan, D. C., & Hawkins, W. G. (2009). The Accordion Severity Grading System of Surgical Complications. Annals of Surgery. https://doi.org/10.1097/sla.0b013e3181afde41
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.