1. Introduction
Congenital anomalies remain a major cause of neonatal morbidity and mortality worldwide, particularly in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) [
1,
2,
3]. Among these, CGIAs rank as the third most common anomaly, with a global prevalence of approximately 6.42% of live births and a mortality rate reaching 39.8% LMICs [
1,
3,
4].
Despite advancements in neonatal care, CGIAs continue to pose a significant clinical challenge due to delayed diagnosis, limited access to advanced medical interventions, and high rates of postoperative complications such as sepsis, respiratory failure, and multiorgan dysfunction, particularly in LMICs [
1,
5]. In Indonesia, epidemiological data on CGIAs remain scarce. At Hasan Sadikin General Hospital, a national referral center in West Java, 166 neonates with CGIAs were treated between January 2022 and September 2024, indicating a considerable clinical burden.
Surgical intervention remains the mainstay of treatment for CGIAs, aiming to correct anatomical defects and improve survival outcomes [
1,
6]. However, not all neonates are eligible for surgery due to poor clinical conditions, including severe sepsis, pulmonary infections, or electrolyte imbalances [
7,
8]. Even among those who undergo surgery, mortality remains high in resource-limited settings, underscoring the urgent need for reliable tools to predict postoperative outcomes [
1,
9].
Prognostic scoring systems serve as valuable tools in neonatal care by enabling early risk stratification, guiding clinical decision-making, and facilitating communication with families. However, to date, there is no established prognostic model specifically designed to predict mortality in neonates with CGIAs undergoing surgery. This study aims to develop a simple, practical prognostic scoring system based on clinical parameters readily available in most LMICs hospital settings, to assist clinicians in improving perioperative management and outcomes.
4. Discussion
Congenital gastrointestinal anomalies are among the most common structural birth defects, ranking third in global prevalence after orthopedic and neurological anomalies [
6]. Although the overall burden of neonatal mortality has declined in recent decades, CGIAs remain a major contributor to early postoperative deaths, particularly in resource-limited settings [
15,
16]. In Indonesia, the neonatal mortality rate in 2019 was 12 per 1000 live births, reflecting both improvements in perinatal care and the ongoing challenges in managing high-risk surgical conditions [
17].
The postoperative mortality rate of 42.9% observed in this study is consistent with findings from other LMICs, where mortality associated with CGIAs frequently exceeds 40%, especially in settings without timely referral systems, adequate neonatal intensive care, or specialized surgical support [
6,
15]. Delays in diagnosis, sepsis, late-stage presentation, and limited perioperative infrastructure contribute substantially to these poor outcomes [
6,
18]. These persistent challenges underscore the urgent need for effective risk stratification tools to guide clinical decision-making and resource allocation in neonatal surgical care.
This study identified four independent predictors of postoperative mortality: neonatal sepsis, need for mechanical ventilation, prematurity, and upper gastrointestinal anomalies. Each of these factors reflects a critical clinical vulnerability that may inform targeted interventions. Sepsis emerged as the most significant predictor of mortality. With a six-fold increase in risk, sepsis exacerbates hemodynamic instability, induces multiorgan dysfunction, and impairs tissue repair following surgery [
19,
20]. Studies have shown that neonates with sepsis are more likely to develop postoperative complications such as wound dehiscence and prolonged ventilator dependence [
10]. These findings are consistent with previous studies, which have consistently identified sepsis as one of the primary drivers of neonatal surgical mortality, particularly in LMICs where early diagnosis and infection control measures remain limited [
5,
6,
21].
In our study, the diagnosis of sepsis was confirmed by the presence of a positive blood culture obtained prior to surgery, which, while specific, requires prolonged incubation time and may not be routinely available in many healthcare settings [
22]. Early detection remains a major challenge [
23]. Although laboratory-based sepsis markers such as elevated CRP, leukopenia, and hypoalbuminemia were explored, none showed statistically significant associations with mortality in our cohort [
22,
24]. This underscores the limitations of relying solely on these markers for early risk stratification, and the need for more robust, sensitive screening tools.
Our findings reinforce international recommendations advocating for prompt recognition and aggressive management of neonatal sepsis, particularly in resource-limited neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) settings. The timely initiation of broad-spectrum antibiotics, fluid resuscitations, and supportive care before surgical intervention may substantially improve postoperative outcomes [
25,
26]. Incorporating sepsis screening protocols into neonatal surgical pathways may serve as a critical step toward reducing mortality among this high-risk population.
Mechanical ventilation, although often essential for stabilization, was also independently associated with increased mortality [
23]. The need for ventilatory support reflects the severity of respiratory compromise, which may stem from pulmonary immaturity, infection, or advanced disease at presentation. In this study, neonates who required mechanical ventilation had more than a fourfold increase in the odds of postoperative mortality. This finding is consistent with previous research, which also identified endotracheal intubation as a significant predictor of postoperative mortality in neonates. The requirement for mechanical ventilation frequently indicates the presence of severe respiratory distress, suggesting a reduced physiologic reserve and increased perioperative risk [
5].
This study also aligns with findings from other study who reported that ventilator dependence was a strong predictor of poor outcomes in neonatal surgery, particularly in cases requiring prolonged support [
21,
23]. Mechanical ventilated neonates are often at increased risk for complication such as ventilator-associated pneumonia, oxygen toxicity, and barotrauma, which may further compromise recovery [
27,
28]. Additionally, ventilator dependence may reflect delayed presentation or more advanced disease severity at the time of surgery, both of which contribute to worse prognoses.
Prematurity, a known risk factor for poor outcomes in neonates, showed an adjusted odds ratio close to 2 in this study [
21,
29,
30]. Preterm infants often have underdeveloped lungs, immature immune systems, and limited cardiorespiratory reserves, making them more vulnerable to perioperative complications [
31]. They are at increased risk of sepsis, temperature instability, electrolyte imbalances, and delayed wound healing, all of which may impair recovery following surgery [
21,
29]. Moreover, their reduced physiological resilience often results in a lower tolerance for anesthesia and surgical stress, contributing to higher morbidity and mortality rates [
32]. Although the association was only marginally significant in the multivariate analysis, the inclusion of prematurity in the scoring model is justified by its consistent association with adverse surgical outcomes in neonates, as shown in various global studies [
6].
Upper gastrointestinal (GI) anomalies, including esophageal atresia and congenital diaphragmatic hernia (CDH), were associated with nearly a two-fold increase in mortality. These anomalies often require more complex surgical repair and are frequently accompanied by respiratory distress, feeding intolerance, or both [
33]. Several studies have identified CDH as a major contributor to neonatal surgical mortality, largely due to severity of associated pulmonary hypoplasia and persistent pulmonary hypertension [
34]. Surgical repair of diaphragmatic defects can be performed via either abdominal or thoracic access, with the abdominal route more commonly associated with gastrointestinal complication requiring reoperation [
35].
Recent evidence further emphasizes that postoperative outcomes in CDH are strongly determined by the neonate’s baseline clinical condition rather than the surgical approach itself. A recent meta-analysis found no significant difference in morbidity between bedside and operating room repairs, noting instead that bedside procedures were typically performed in critically ill infants [
36]. Similarly, a 2025 meta-analysis comparing thoracoscopic and open repair of CDH concluded that thoracoscopy was preferentially performed in neonates with lower morbidity, whereas open repair was more often applied in critically ill patients [
37]. These findings support the concept that surgical decision-making for CDH is often driven by illness severity, which in turn explains the higher mortality observed in this subgroup.
Esophageal atresia has likewise been consistently recognized as a significant risk factor for mortality in neonates undergoing surgery [
4]. These neonates often require meticulous preoperative stabilization and staged surgical correction and remain prone to complications such as anastomotic leaks, strictures, and aspiration pneumonia [
23]. Beyond the perioperative period, a recent comprehensive review on long-term outcomes of CDH survivors emphasized persistent risks of chronic lung disease, gastrointestinal morbidity, and neurodevelopmental impairment, underscoring the broader burden of upper GI anomalies beyond the immediate postoperative phase [
38]. Taken together, these findings support the inclusion of upper GI anomalies as a key prognostic factor in mortality risk models, as they consistently present with greater surgical complexity, higher preoperative instability, and more prolonged postoperative vulnerability compared to lower GI anomalies.
The scoring system developed in this study, the FILLA score, offers a pragmatic tool for early mortality prediction in neonatal surgical care. With an AUC of 0.840, it demonstrated comparable discriminatory performance to other neonatal scoring systems, such as the SNAP-II (AUC 0.894), but with fewer and exclusively preoperative variables [
39]. This simplicity enhances its feasibility for bedside application in resource-limited settings. Potential integrations into neonatal care pathways includes use at NICU admission for risk stratification, preoperative surgical counseling, and early family discussion regarding prognosis. Furthermore, the FILLA score may be adapted into digital decision-support tools, such as mobile applications or electronic calculators, to facilitate rapid bedside assessment.
This study has several limitations. First, the cohort comprised a heterogeneous group of CGIAs, with varying severity and prognosis, which may introduce selection bias. Our aim, however, was not to compare outcomes between specific anomalies, but rather to identify broadly applicable preoperative predictors across the CGIAs spectrum. Second, neonates who died within 24 h postoperatively were excluded to reduce confounding from extreme perioperative instability; nonetheless, this exclusion may have led to an underestimation of the true perioperative mortality risk. Third, potentially relevant variables—including timing of presentation and surgery, nutritional status, antenatal diagnosis, socioeconomic background, and access to advanced NICU care—were not consistently available in our retrospective dataset. Fourth, surgical characteristics such as procedure type and duration, intraoperative blood loss, transfusions, and postoperative complications (e.g., anastomosis leak or surgical site infection) were not incorporated because of incomplete and inconsistent documentation. While this reduced granularity, our primary goal was to design a prognostic tool based solely on simple, readily available preoperative variables that can be applied in resource-limited settings. Future multicenter prospective studies with more comprehensive perioperative data collection are needed to validate the FILLA score and enhance its predictive accuracy and clinical utility.