Operative-Time Gradients Reveal Miscalibration in Microsurgical Risk Prediction

BACKGROUND: General surgical risk models support perioperative counselling, but acceptable overall calibration may conceal clinically important error. We evaluated generalized American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS NSQIP) predictions after microsurgical reconstruction and tested whether morbidity calibration varied across operative time. METHODS: Adult ACS NSQIP cases from 2014-2023 were analyzed. Plastic-surgery-service cases meeting exact principal Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) or principal-procedure-text criteria formed the primary cohort. Performance was assessed using observed-to-expected (O:E) ratios, discrimination, and calibration measures. Operative-time calibration was examined by quartiles, deciles, and continuous spline models. Sensitivity analyses used exact principal CPT codes alone and excluded cases with a known morbidity component or reoperation on postoperative day 0 or 1. RESULTS: Among 20,604 microsurgery cases, observed and predicted morbidity were similar overall (12.52% vs. 12.79%; O:E, 0.98; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.94-1.02), although discrimination was modest (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, 0.639; 95% CI, 0.627-0.651). Mortality was uncommon (21 deaths; O:E, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.50-1.24). Aggregate calibration concealed a graded reversal across operative time. Morbidity was overpredicted in the shortest quartile (8.66% observed vs. 12.87% predicted; O:E, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.61-0.74) and underpredicted in the longest quartile (16.94% vs. 12.96%; O:E, 1.31; 95% CI, 1.22-1.40). The prespecified linear interaction was nonsignificant (P = 0.183), whereas flexible continuous analyses demonstrated calibration variation before and after global recalibration (both P < 0.001). Findings persisted in both sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Generalized ACS NSQIP morbidity prediction was accurate in aggregate but systematically miscalibrated across the operative-time gradient, overestimating risk in shorter operations and underestimating it in longer operations. Realized operative time should be interpreted as a postoperative marker of incompletely captured procedural complexity and intraoperative course, not as a causal exposure or preoperative predictor.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Reconstructive Microsurgery
Published
2026-08-21
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2943-3902
Primary Topic
Cardiac, Anesthesia and Surgical Outcomes
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Operative-Time Gradients Reveal Miscalibration in Microsurgical Risk Prediction

Miracle Uzoekwe, Casey Tompkins-Rhoades, Scott Hansen, Minh Trinh et al.
Journal of Reconstructive Microsurgery
Cardiac, Anesthesia and Surgical Outcomes
article

Operative-Time Gradients Reveal Miscalibration in Microsurgical Risk Prediction

Miracle Uzoekwe, Casey Tompkins-Rhoades, Scott Hansen, Minh Trinh, Shaan Sekhon, Hiteshi Patel, Angelica McDaniel
article en

Abstract

BACKGROUND: General surgical risk models support perioperative counselling, but acceptable overall calibration may conceal clinically important error. We evaluated generalized American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS NSQIP) predictions after microsurgical reconstruction and tested whether morbidity calibration varied across operative time. METHODS: Adult ACS NSQIP cases from 2014-2023 were analyzed. Plastic-surgery-service cases meeting exact principal Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) or principal-procedure-text criteria formed the primary cohort. Performance was assessed using observed-to-expected (O:E) ratios, discrimination, and calibration measures. Operative-time calibration was examined by quartiles, deciles, and continuous spline models. Sensitivity analyses used exact principal CPT codes alone and excluded cases with a known morbidity component or reoperation on postoperative day 0 or 1. RESULTS: Among 20,604 microsurgery cases, observed and predicted morbidity were similar overall (12.52% vs. 12.79%; O:E, 0.98; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.94-1.02), although discrimination was modest (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, 0.639; 95% CI, 0.627-0.651). Mortality was uncommon (21 deaths; O:E, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.50-1.24). Aggregate calibration concealed a graded reversal across operative time. Morbidity was overpredicted in the shortest quartile (8.66% observed vs. 12.87% predicted; O:E, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.61-0.74) and underpredicted in the longest quartile (16.94% vs. 12.96%; O:E, 1.31; 95% CI, 1.22-1.40). The prespecified linear interaction was nonsignificant (P = 0.183), whereas flexible continuous analyses demonstrated calibration variation before and after global recalibration (both P < 0.001). Findings persisted in both sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Generalized ACS NSQIP morbidity prediction was accurate in aggregate but systematically miscalibrated across the operative-time gradient, overestimating risk in shorter operations and underestimating it in longer operations. Realized operative time should be interpreted as a postoperative marker of incompletely captured procedural complexity and intraoperative course, not as a causal exposure or preoperative predictor.

Journal of Reconstructive Microsurgery
University of California, San Francisco (US)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 10%
Cardiac, Anesthesia and Surgical Outcomes
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.