Comparison of Subjective Global Assessment and Nutritional Risk Index on Outcome after Abdominal Surgery

Abstract

Introduction: Preexisting malnutrition in surgical patients has been conclusively correlated with complications such as wound infection and myriad of other adverse outcomes during and after hospitalization. So, it is imperative to recognize and manage this status preoperatively in an effort to improve outcome. The aim of the study was to compare the Subjective Global Assessment (SGA) and Nutritional Risk Index (NRI) with outcome after abdominal surgery.

Methods: This is a prospective study conducted at the Department of Surgery, Tribhuvan University Teaching Hospital, Nepal, for the period of one year. The study included a total of fifty patients undergoing abdominal surgery. Patients were assessed with two types of nutritional assessment techniques, namely, SGA and NRI. The outcome parameters included were wound infection, and chest infection, and length of hospital stay.

Results: No complications occurred in 24 of the 50 patients; 13 patients had more than one complication. The frequency of malnutrition was found to be 74% and 80% as assessed by SGA and NRI respectively. Morbidity rate was significantly higher and length of hospital stay was also longer in malnourished patients assessed by SGA group. Wound infection rate was significantly higher and length of hospital stay was also longer in malnourished patients when assessed by SGA. The area under the receiver operating characteristics curve for SGA and NRI revealed that SGA was better for predicting overall morbidity as well as specific complications than the NRI. Three patients died during treatment period.

Conclusions: Malnutrition is a marker of poor postoperative outcome. Subjective Global Assessment is better than Nutritional Risk Index to predict postoperative complications in patients undergoing abdominal surgery.