Neurosurgical inpatient mortality varies depending on patient characteristics, pathology, and surgical context.
Study: US national database (2016–2020, >14,000 patients age ≥40)
Clinical Scenario | Inpatient Mortality Rate |
---|---|
General neurosurgical admissions | 2.7 – 4.5 % |
Elective adult admissions | ~1.95 % |
Chronic subdural hematoma (surgical) | 3.6 % |
Chronic subdural hematoma (non-surgical) | 10.9 % |
Elderly patients (≥65) | ~4 % |
Severe TBI with ICP monitoring | ~29.3 % |
Neurosurgical infections | ~11 % |
In a cross‑sectional analysis, Kamp et al. from:
published in the Neurosurgical Review
Journal, analyzed 2023 in-hospital neurosurgical mortality using nationwide billing data in Germany.
Study offers a national benchmark but relies entirely on administrative data.
Reliance on §21 InEK billing data means:
Raw mortality rates without risk stratification are misleading.
The reported sex difference may reflect unadjusted confounders.
Similar national audits (UK, US) already exist.
This adds little beyond local replication.
Authors admit no causal inference, but still present data as benchmarks.
They ignore biases like repeated admissions or misclassification.
Quoting procedure-specific mortality (e.g. 9 % for vascular cases)
without clinical context may unfairly penalize high-risk centers.
Suggesting policy relevance or clinical utility is unconvincing
without proper risk modeling.
Flawed epidemiological exercise. Too crude for benchmarking; lacks clinical depth; no actionable utility.
Do not use raw mortality data from this study to compare providers. Instead, push for risk-adjusted, registry-based outcome tracking.
An incomplete administrative snapshot. Inadequate for policy, benchmarking, or clinical decision-making.
2/10 — Large dataset undermined by methodological and interpretative weakness.
Kamp MA, Jungk C, Schneider M, Fehler G, Santacroce A, Dinc N, Ebner FH, von Sass C, et al. **Inpatient neurosurgical mortality in Germany: a comprehensive analysis of 2023 in‑hospital data.** ''Neurosurgical Review''. 2025 Jun 23;48(1):525. doi:10.1007/s10143-025-03664-1. PMID:40545502. Received: 10 Feb 2025; Revised: 19 May 2025; Accepted: 8 Jun 2025. Corresponding author: Marcel A. Kamp <marcelalexander.kamp@gmail.com>.