Abstract Aims The HAS (Hajibandeh Index, American Society of Anaesthesiologists status, and sarcopenia) model has demonstrated superior predictive ability compared to the NELA (National Emergency Laparotomy Audit) score for mortality after emergency laparotomy. However, external validation of this model is lacking. This study aimed to validate the HAS model's performance in predicting mortality after emergency laparotomy and compare its predictive accuracy with the NELA score. Methods This retrospective cohort study included all adult patients (>17 years) who underwent emergency laparotomy between January 2022 and June 2023 at an urban district general hospital. Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis was used to compare the HAS model and NELA score in predicting 30-day mortality. Subgroup analysis was conducted for age groups: ≥50, ≥60, ≥70, and ≥80. Results A total of 117 patients were included. The area under the curve (AUC) for the HAS model in predicting 30-day mortality was 0.90 (95% CI 0.83-0.95). There was no statistically significant difference in AUC between the HAS and NELA scores for all patients (0.90 vs 0.80, p = 0.097). However, the AUC of the HAS model was significantly superior to that of the NELA score in patients aged ≥50 (0.89 vs 0.75, p = 0.040), ≥60 (0.87 vs 0.69, p = 0.020), ≥70 (0.85 vs 0.67, p = 0.030), and ≥80 (0.90 vs 0.66, p < 0.001). Conclusions This study provides external validation of the HAS model for predicting 30-day mortality after emergency laparotomy. Prospective studies with larger sample sizes are warranted to confirm these findings.
Read full abstract