Risk Factors and Predictive Accuracy of the Rotterdam Risk Index for Wound Dehiscence Following Abdominal Surgery
2025

Predicting Wound Dehiscence After Abdominal Surgery

Sample size: 151 publication 10 minutes Evidence: high

Author Information

Author(s): Muacevic Alexander, Adler John R, Sharma Rajat, Lonare Siddharth B, Arora Pratul, Al-Dwlai Hamza, Vadher Alpa, Hersi Mohamed

Primary Institution: Byramjee Jeejeebhoy Government Medical College and Sassoon General Hospital

Hypothesis

This study aimed to evaluate the risk factors associated with wound dehiscence and assess the predictive accuracy of the Rotterdam Risk Index in patients undergoing abdominal surgeries.

Conclusion

The Rotterdam Risk Index demonstrated excellent predictive accuracy for identifying patients at high risk of wound dehiscence before surgery.

Supporting Evidence

  • Male patients had a higher risk of wound dehiscence, with odds of 1.9.
  • Emergency surgery was associated with a higher incidence of wound dehiscence with an odds ratio of 4.1.
  • The Rotterdam Risk Index showed high sensitivity (100%) and specificity (90.2%) for predicting wound dehiscence.

Takeaway

Doctors can use a special score called the Rotterdam Risk Index to figure out which patients are more likely to have problems with their wounds after surgery, helping them take better care of those patients.

Methodology

This was a retrospective observational study that included 151 patients who underwent exploratory laparotomy, with data collected on demographics, comorbidities, surgical factors, and postoperative complications.

Potential Biases

Potential selection bias due to the retrospective design.

Limitations

The retrospective nature of the study may introduce selection bias, affecting the performance metrics of the Rotterdam Risk Index.

Participant Demographics

Adult patients aged 18 years and older who underwent midline laparotomy.

Statistical Information

P-Value

0.021

Confidence Interval

1.1-3.3

Statistical Significance

p<0.05

Digital Object Identifier (DOI)

10.7759/cureus.76769

Want to read the original?

Access the complete publication on the publisher's website

View Original Publication