Related Experiment Video
Updated: Apr 26, 2026

Vessel-sparing Excision and Primary Anastomosis
Published on: January 7, 2019
Interobserver variability of Clavien-Dindo scoring in urology
Sławomir Poletajew1, Lukasz Zapała, Sebastian Piotrowicz
1Department of General, Oncological and Functional Urology, Infant Jesus Clinical Hospital, Medical University of Warsaw, Warsaw, Poland.
Insights
Interobserver variability in Clavien-Dindo scoring for urological complications is significant, indicating a need for classification refinement and specialist training to improve its use in quality assessment.
Area of Science:
- Urology
- Surgical Outcomes Assessment
- Medical Error Analysis
Background:
- The Clavien-Dindo classification is a widely used system for grading surgical complications.
- Standardized assessment of surgical outcomes is crucial for quality improvement in urology.
- Interobserver agreement is essential for the reliable application of any grading system.
Purpose of the Study:
- To evaluate the interobserver variability of the Clavien-Dindo classification among urologists.
- To identify factors influencing the agreement in grading urological complications.
- To assess the suitability of the Clavien-Dindo classification for quality assessment in urology.
Main Methods:
- A thematic survey was conducted across nine Polish urological centers.
- 171 urologists and urologists-in-training participated in the study.
- Respondents graded nine typical urological complications using the Clavien-Dindo classification.
Main Results:
- Moderate agreement (κ = 0.45) was observed among respondents for Clavien-Dindo grading.
- Surgical approach and physician experience did not significantly impact agreement.
- Discrepancies were most notable for local complications after transurethral surgery and severe general complications after Bricker operation.
Conclusions:
- Significant variability exists in the application of Clavien-Dindo scoring within urology.
- The Clavien-Dindo classification may require further detailing and specific training for consistent implementation.
- Despite variability, its simplicity and logical structure offer potential for quality assessment in urology.
Objectives:
To assess the interobserver variability of Clavien-Dindo scoring in urology.
Methods:
A thematic survey was carried out simultaneously in nine Polish urological centers among 171 responders - 81 urologists and 90 urologists-in-training, made up of 16 women and 155 men. After Clavien-Dindo classification was presented, respondents were asked to grade nine typical urological complications according to Clavien-Dindo classification. Interobserver agreement, reproducibility of answers, as well as the influencing factors were analyzed. Questions in the survey related to complications of variable severity after basic urological operations, including four open, one laparoscopic and four endourological.
Results:
Agreement on the grade of complication was moderate (κ = 0.45) and it was noticed in 69% of respondents (range 38-87%). No effect of surgical approach (classic vs endoscopic, 70% vs 67%, P = 0.64), or physician professional experience (resident vs urologist, 71% vs 66%, P = 0.77) was observed. The most significant discrepancies were found in cases of local complications after transurethral surgery (accordance in 39%) and laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (accordance in 55%), and in cases of severe general complications after Bricker operation (accordance in 58%).
Conclusions:
The variability of Clavien-Dindo classification scoring among urologists is significant. Thus, the Clavien-Dindo classification might require detailing before its eventual implementation in urology, together with appropriate training of specialists. However, despite some disadvantages, the simplicity, reproducibility and logical scheme of the Clavien-Dindo classification make it a promising tool for quality assessment in different fields of urology.
Related Concept Videos
Imaging Studies V: Intravenous Urography and Retrograde Pyelography
Urodynamic Studies: Uroflowmetry
Imaging Studies VI: Voiding Cystourethrography and Cystography
Imaging Studies I: Kidney, Ureter, and Bladder Studies
Urinary Tract Calculi VI: Surgical Management
Urinary Tract Calculi II: Pathophysiology and Clinical Manifestations

