RESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: This is a protocol for a Cochrane Review (intervention). The objectives are as follows: To assess the benefits and harms of laparoscopic or robot-assisted pancreatoduodenectomy versus open pancreatoduodenectomy for people with benign, premalignant, and malignant disease.
Asunto(s)
Laparoscopía , Neoplasias Pancreáticas , Pancreaticoduodenectomía , Lesiones Precancerosas , Humanos , Pancreaticoduodenectomía/métodos , Pancreaticoduodenectomía/efectos adversos , Laparoscopía/métodos , Laparoscopía/efectos adversos , Lesiones Precancerosas/cirugía , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/cirugía , Revisiones Sistemáticas como Asunto , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Robotizados/métodos , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Robotizados/efectos adversos , Enfermedades Pancreáticas/cirugíaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Treatment outcomes of incidental gallbladder cancer generally stem from tertiary referral centres, while many patients are initially diagnosed and managed in secondary care centres. Referral patterns of patients with incidental gallbladder cancer are poorly reported. This study aimed to evaluate incidental gallbladder cancer treatment in secondary centres, rates of referral to tertiary centres and its impact on survival. METHODS: Medical records of patients with incidental gallbladder cancer diagnosed between 2000 and 2019 in 27 Dutch secondary centres were retrospectively reviewed. Patient characteristics, surgical treatment, tumour characteristics, referral pattern and survival were assessed. Predictors for overall survival were determined using multivariable Cox regression. RESULTS: In total, 382 patients with incidental gallbladder cancer were included. Of 243 patients eligible for re-resection (pT1b-pT3, M0), 131 (53.9%) were referred to a tertiary centre. The reason not to refer, despite indication for re-resection, was not documented for 52 of 112 non-referred patients (46.4%). In total, 98 patients underwent additional surgery with curative intent (40.3%), 12 of these in the secondary centre. Median overall survival was 33 months (95% c.i. 24 to 42 months) in referred patients versus 17 months (95% c.i. 3 to 31 months) in the non-referred group (P = 0.019). Referral to a tertiary centre was independently associated with improved survival after correction for age, ASA classification, tumour stage and resection margin (HR 0.60, 95% c.i. 0.38 to 0.97; P = 0.037). CONCLUSION: Poor incidental gallbladder cancer referral rates were associated with worse survival. Age, performance status, resection margin or tumour stage should not preclude referral of a patient with incidental gallbladder cancer to a tertiary centre.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Vesícula Biliar , Humanos , Neoplasias de la Vesícula Biliar/epidemiología , Neoplasias de la Vesícula Biliar/cirugía , Neoplasias de la Vesícula Biliar/diagnóstico , Estudios Retrospectivos , Márgenes de Escisión , Hallazgos Incidentales , Estadificación de Neoplasias , Derivación y ConsultaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: In 2013, the nationwide Dutch Hepato Biliary Audit (DHBA) was initiated. The aim of this study was to evaluate changes in indications for and outcomes of liver surgery in the last decade. METHODS: This nationwide study included all patients who underwent liver surgery for four indications, including colorectal liver metastases (CRLM), hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), and intrahepatic- and perihilar cholangiocarcinoma (iCCA - pCCA) between 2014 and 2022. Trends in postoperative outcomes were evaluated separately for each indication using multilevel multivariable logistic regression analyses. RESULTS: This study included 8057 procedures for CRLM, 838 for HCC, 290 for iCCA, and 300 for pCCA. Over time, these patients had higher risk profiles (more ASA-III patients and more comorbidities). Adjusted mortality decreased over time for CRLM, HCC and iCCA, respectively aOR 0.83, 95%CI 0.75-0.92, P < 0.001; aOR 0.86, 95%CI 0.75-0.99, P = 0.045; aOR 0.40, 95%CI 0.20-0.73, P < 0.001. Failure to rescue (FTR) also decreased for these groups, respectively aOR 0.84, 95%CI 0.76-0.93, P = 0.001; aOR 0.81, 95%CI 0.68-0.97, P = 0.024; aOR 0.29, 95%CI 0.08-0.84, P = 0.021). For iCCA severe complications (aOR 0.65 95%CI 0.43-0.99, P = 0.043) also decreased. No significant outcome differences were observed in pCCA. The number of centres performing liver resections decreased from 26 to 22 between 2014 and 2022, while median annual volumes did not change (40-49, P = 0.66). CONCLUSION: Over time, postoperative mortality and FTR decreased after liver surgery, despite treating higher-risk patients. The DHBA continues its focus on providing feedback and benchmark results to further enhance outcomes.
Asunto(s)
Carcinoma Hepatocelular , Neoplasias Colorrectales , Hepatectomía , Neoplasias Hepáticas , Humanos , Países Bajos/epidemiología , Neoplasias Hepáticas/cirugía , Neoplasias Hepáticas/secundario , Masculino , Femenino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Anciano , Carcinoma Hepatocelular/cirugía , Carcinoma Hepatocelular/mortalidad , Neoplasias Colorrectales/cirugía , Neoplasias Colorrectales/patología , Colangiocarcinoma/cirugía , Colangiocarcinoma/patología , Neoplasias de los Conductos Biliares/cirugía , Neoplasias de los Conductos Biliares/patología , Fracaso de Rescate en Atención a la Salud , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/epidemiología , Auditoría Médica , Resultado del Tratamiento , Tumor de Klatskin/cirugía , Tumor de Klatskin/patología , Tumor de Klatskin/mortalidadRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Approximately 70% of patients with colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) experiences intrahepatic recurrence after initial liver resection. This study assessed outcomes and hospital variation in repeat liver resections (R-LR). METHODS: This population-based study included all patients who underwent liver resection for CRLM between 2014 and 2022 in the Netherlands. Overall survival (OS) was collected for patients operated on between 2014 and 2018 by linkage to the insurance database. RESULTS: Data of 7479 liver resections (1391 (18.6%) repeat and 6088 (81.4%) primary) were analysed. Major morbidity and mortality were not different. Factors associated with major morbidity included ASA 3+, major liver resection, extrahepatic disease, and open surgery. Five-year OS after repeat versus primary liver resection was 42.3% versus 44.8%, P = 0.37. Factors associated with worse OS included largest CRLM >5 cm (aHR 1.58, 95% CI: 1.07-2.34, P = 0.023), >3 CRLM (aHR 1.33, 95% CI: 1.00-1.75, P = 0.046), extrahepatic disease (aHR 1.60, 95% CI: 1.25-2.04, P = 0.001), positive tumour margins (aHR 1.42, 95% CI: 1.09-1.85, P = 0.009). Significant hospital variation in performance of R-LR was observed, median 18.9% (8.2% to 33.3%). CONCLUSION: Significant hospital variation was observed in performance of R-LR in the Netherlands reflecting different treatment decisions upon recurrence. On a population-based level R-LR leads to satisfactory survival.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias Colorrectales , Hepatectomía , Neoplasias Hepáticas , Reoperación , Humanos , Neoplasias Colorrectales/patología , Neoplasias Colorrectales/mortalidad , Neoplasias Colorrectales/cirugía , Masculino , Países Bajos , Neoplasias Hepáticas/secundario , Neoplasias Hepáticas/cirugía , Neoplasias Hepáticas/mortalidad , Femenino , Hepatectomía/mortalidad , Hepatectomía/efectos adversos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Anciano , Recurrencia Local de Neoplasia , Resultado del Tratamiento , Estudios Retrospectivos , Hospitales/estadística & datos numéricos , Bases de Datos FactualesRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Textbook outcome (TO) represents a multidimensional quality measurement, encompassing the desirable short-term outcomes following surgery. This study aimed to investigate whether achieving TO after resection of colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) surgery is related to better overall survival (OS) in a national cohort. METHOD: Data was retrieved from the Dutch Hepato Biliary Audit. A modified definition of TO (mTO) was used because readmissions were only recorded from 2019. mTO was achieved when no severe postoperative complications, mortality, prolonged length of hospital stay, occurred and when adequate surgical resection margins were obtained. To compare outcomes of patients with and without mTO and reduce baseline differences between both groups propensity score matching (PSM) was used for patients operated on between 2014 and 2018. RESULTS: Out of 6525 eligible patients, 81 % achieved mTO. For the cohort between 2014 and 2018, those achieving mTO had a 5-year OS of 46.7 % (CI 44.8-48.6) while non-mTO patients had a 5-year OS of 33.7 % (CI 29.8-38.2), p < 0.001. Not achieving mTO was associated with a worse OS (aHR 1.34 (95 % CI 1.17-1.53), p < 0.001. Median follow-up was 76 months., PSM assigned 519 patients to each group. In the PSM cohort patients achieving mTO, 5-year OS was 43.6 % (95 % CI 39.2-48.5) compared to 36.4 % (95 % CI 31.9-41.2) in patients who did not achieve mTO, p = 0.006. CONCLUSION: Achieving mTO is associated with improved long-term survival. This emphasizes the importance of optimising perioperative care and reducing postoperative complications in surgical treatment of CRLM.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias Colorrectales , Neoplasias Hepáticas , Humanos , Estudios Retrospectivos , Hepatectomía/métodos , Neoplasias Colorrectales/patología , Neoplasias Hepáticas/secundario , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/etiología , Puntaje de PropensiónRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: In colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) patients, combination of liver resection and ablation permit a more parenchymal-sparing approach. This study assessed trends in use of combined resection and ablation, outcomes, and overall survival (OS). METHODS: This population-based study included all CRLM patients who underwent liver resection between 2014 and 2022. To assess OS, data was linked to two databases containing date of death for patients treated between 2014 and 2018. Hospital variation in the use of combined minor liver resection and ablation versus major liver resection alone in patients with 2-3 CRLM and ≤3 cm was assessed. Propensity score matching (PSM) was applied to evaluate outcomes. RESULTS: This study included 3593 patients, of whom 1336 (37.2%) underwent combined resection and ablation. Combined resection increased from 31.7% in 2014 to 47.9% in 2022. Significant hospital variation (range 5.9-53.8%) was observed in the use of combined minor liver resection and ablation. PSM resulted in 1005 patients in each group. Major morbidity was not different (11.6% vs. 5%, P = 1.00). Liver failure occurred less often after combined resection and ablation (1.9% vs. 0.6%, P = 0.017). Five-year OS rates were not different (39.3% vs. 33.9%, P = 0.145). CONCLUSION: Combined resection and ablation should be available and considered as an alternative to resection alone in any patient with multiple metastases.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias Colorrectales , Neoplasias Hepáticas , Humanos , Neoplasias Colorrectales/patología , Puntaje de Propensión , Estudios Retrospectivos , Neoplasias Hepáticas/secundario , Hepatectomía/efectos adversos , Hepatectomía/métodos , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Routine treatment with preoperative systemic chemotherapy (CTx) in patients with colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) remains controversial due to lack of consistent evidence demonstrating associated survival benefits. This study aimed to determine the effect of preoperative CTx on overall survival (OS) compared to surgery alone and to assess hospital and oncological network variation in 5-year OS. METHODS: This was a population-based study of all patients who underwent liver resection for CRLM between 2014 and 2017 in the Netherlands. After 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM), OS was compared between patients treated with and without preoperative CTx. Hospital and oncological network variation in 5-year OS corrected for case-mix factors was calculated using an observed/expected ratio. RESULTS: Of 2820 patients included, 852 (30.2%) and 1968 (69.8%) patients were treated with preoperative CTx and surgery alone, respectively. After PSM, 537 patients remained in each group, median number of CRLM; 3 [IQR 2-4], median size of CRLM; 28 mm [IQR 18-44], synchronous CLRM (71.1%). Median follow-up was 80.8 months. Five-year OS rates after PSM for patients treated with and without preoperative chemotherapy were 40.2% versus 38.3% (log-rank P = 0.734). After stratification for low, medium, and high tumour burden based on the tumour burden score (TBS) OS was similar for preoperative chemotherapy vs. surgery alone (log-rank P = 0.486, P = 0.914, and P = 0.744, respectively). After correction for non-modifiable patient and tumour characteristics, no relevant hospital or oncological network variation in five-year OS was observed. CONCLUSION: In patients eligible for surgical resection, preoperative chemotherapy does not provide an overall survival benefit compared to surgery alone.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias Colorrectales , Neoplasias Hepáticas , Humanos , Neoplasias Colorrectales/patología , Puntaje de Propensión , Estudios Retrospectivos , Hepatectomía , Neoplasias Hepáticas/tratamiento farmacológico , Neoplasias Hepáticas/cirugíaRESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: In 2017, the Southampton guideline stated that minimally invasive liver resections (MILR) should considered standard practice for minor liver resections. This study aimed to assess recent implementation rates of minor MILR, factors associated with performing MILR, hospital variation, and outcomes in patients with colorectal liver metastases (CRLM). METHODS: This population-based study included all patients who underwent minor liver resection for CRLM in the Netherlands between 2014 and 2021. Factors associated with MILR and nationwide hospital variation were assessed using multilevel multivariable logistic regression. Propensity-score matching (PSM) was applied to compare outcomes between minor MILR and minor open liver resections. Overall survival (OS) was assessed with Kaplan-Meier analysis on patients operated until 2018. RESULTS: Of 4,488 patients included, 1,695 (37.8%) underwent MILR. PSM resulted in 1,338 patients in each group. Implementation of MILR increased to 51.2% in 2021. Factors associated with not performing MILR included treatment with preoperative chemotherapy (aOR 0.61 CI:0.50-0.75, p < 0.001), treatment in a tertiary referral hospital (aOR 0.57 CI:0.50-0.67, p < 0.001), and larger diameter and number of CRLM. Significant hospital variation was observed in use of MILR (7.5% to 93.0%). After case-mix correction, six hospitals performed fewer, and six hospitals performed more MILRs than expected. In the PSM cohort, MILR was associated with a decrease in blood loss (aOR 0.99 CI:0.99-0.99, p < 0.01), cardiac complications (aOR 0.29, CI:0.10-0.70, p = 0.009), IC admissions (aOR 0.66, CI:0.50-0.89, p = 0.005), and shorter hospital stay (aOR CI:0.94-0.99, p < 0.01). Five-year OS rates for MILR and OLR were 53.7% versus 48.6%, p = 0.21. CONCLUSION: Although uptake of MILR is increasing in the Netherlands, significant hospital variation remains. MILR benefits short-term outcomes, while overall survival is comparable to open liver surgery.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias Colorrectales , Laparoscopía , Neoplasias Hepáticas , Humanos , Laparoscopía/métodos , Neoplasias Hepáticas/secundario , Hepatectomía/métodos , Tiempo de Internación , Neoplasias Colorrectales/cirugía , Neoplasias Colorrectales/patología , Estudios RetrospectivosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The European registry for minimally invasive pancreatic surgery (E-MIPS) collects data on laparoscopic and robotic MIPS in low- and high-volume centers across Europe. METHODS: Analysis of the first year (2019) of the E-MIPS registry, including minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) and minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy (MIPD). Primary outcome was 90-day mortality. RESULTS: Overall, 959 patients from 54 centers in 15 countries were included, 558 patients underwent MIDP and 401 patients MIPD. Median volume of MIDP was 10 (7-20) and 9 (2-20) for MIPD. Median use of MIDP was 56.0% (IQR 39.0-77.3%) and median use of MIPD 27.7% (IQR 9.7-45.3%). MIDP was mostly performed laparoscopic (401/558, 71.9%) and MIPD mostly robotic (234/401, 58.3%). MIPD was performed in 50/54 (89.3%) centers, of which 15/50 (30.0%) performed ≥20 MIPD annually. This was 30/54 (55.6%) centers and 13/30 (43%) centers for MIPD respectively. Conversion rate was 10.9% for MIDP and 8.4% for MIPD. Overall 90 day mortality was 1.1% (n = 6) for MIDP and 3.7% (n = 15) for MIPD. CONCLUSION: Within the E-MIPS registry, MIDP is performed in about half of all patients, mostly using laparoscopy. MIPD is performed in about a quarter of patients, slightly more often using the robotic approach. A minority of centers met the Miami guideline volume criteria for MIPD.
Asunto(s)
Laparoscopía , Neoplasias Pancreáticas , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Robotizados , Humanos , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/cirugía , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Robotizados/efectos adversos , Páncreas/cirugía , Pancreatectomía/efectos adversos , Pancreaticoduodenectomía/efectos adversos , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Mínimamente Invasivos , Laparoscopía/efectos adversos , Sistema de Registros , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/etiología , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Disseminated disease (DD) is often found at (re-)exploration in gallbladder cancer (GBC) patients. We aimed to assess the yield of staging laparoscopy (SL) and identify predictors for DD. METHODS: This retrospective study included patients from all Dutch academic centres with primary GBC (pGBC) and incidentally diagnosed GBC (iGBC) planned for (re-)resection. The yield of SL was determined. In iGBC, predictive factors for DD were assessed. RESULTS: In total, 290 patients were included. Of 183 included pGBC patients, 143 underwent laparotomy without SL, and 42 (29%) showed DD perioperatively. SL, conducted in 40 patients, identified DD in eight. DD was found in nine of 32 patients who underwent laparotomy after SL. Of 107 included iGBC patients, 100 underwent laparotomy without SL, and 19 showed DD perioperatively. SL, conducted in seven patients, identified DD in one. Cholecystitis (OR = 4.25; 95% CI 1.51-11.91) and primary R1/R2 resection (OR = 3.94; 95% CI 1.39-11.19) were independent predictive factors for DD. CONCLUSIONS: In pGBC patients, SL may identify DD in up to 20% of patients and should be part of standard management. In iGBC patients, SL is indicated after primary resection for cholecystitis and after initial R1/R2 resection due to the association of these factors with DD.
Asunto(s)
Carcinoma in Situ , Colecistitis , Neoplasias de la Vesícula Biliar , Laparoscopía , Humanos , Neoplasias de la Vesícula Biliar/diagnóstico , Neoplasias de la Vesícula Biliar/cirugía , Neoplasias de la Vesícula Biliar/patología , Estudios de Cohortes , Estudios Retrospectivos , Estadificación de Neoplasias , Colecistitis/cirugía , Carcinoma in Situ/cirugíaRESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Textbook outcome (TO) is a composite outcome measure covering the surgical care process in a single outcome measure. TO has an advantage over single outcome parameters with low event rates, which have less discriminating impact to detect differences between hospitals. This study aimed to assess factors associated with TO, and evaluate hospital and network variation after case-mix correction in TO rates for liver surgery. METHODS: This was a population-based retrospective study of all patients who underwent liver resection for malignancy in the Netherlands in 2019 and 2020. TO was defined as absence of severe postoperative complications, mortality, prolonged length of hospital stay, and readmission, and obtaining adequate resection margins. Multivariable logistic regression was used for case-mix adjustment. RESULTS: 2376 patients were included. TO was accomplished in 1380 (80%) patients with colorectal liver metastases, in 192 (76%) patients with other liver metastases, in 183 (74%) patients with hepatocellular carcinoma and 86 (51%) patients with biliary cancers. Factors associated with lower TO rates for CRLM included ASA score ≥3 (aOR 0.70, CI 0.51-0.95 p = 0.02), extrahepatic disease (aOR 0.64, CI 0.44-0.95, p = 0.02), tumour size >55 mm on preoperative imaging (aOR 0.56, CI 0.34-0.94, p = 0.02), Charlson Comorbidity Index ≥2 (aOR 0.73, CI 0.54-0.98, p = 0.04), and major liver resection (aOR 0.50, CI 0.36-0.69, p < 0.001). After case-mix correction, no significant hospital or oncological network variation was observed. CONCLUSION: TO differs between indications for liver resection and can be used to assess between hospital and network differences.
Asunto(s)
Hepatectomía , Neoplasias Hepáticas , Humanos , Estudios Retrospectivos , Hepatectomía/efectos adversos , Hospitales , Tiempo de Internación , Neoplasias Hepáticas/cirugía , Neoplasias Hepáticas/complicaciones , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/epidemiología , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/etiologíaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Somatostatin analogues (SA) are currently used to prevent postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) development. However, its use is controversial. This study investigated the effect of different SA protocols on the incidence of POPF after pancreatoduodenectomy in a nationwide population. METHODS: All patients undergoing elective open pancreatoduodenectomy were included from the Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Audit (2014-2017). Patients were divided into six groups: no SA, octreotide, lanreotide, pasireotide, octreotide only in high-risk (HR) patients and lanreotide only in HR patients. Primary endpoint was POPF grade B/C. The updated alternative Fistula Risk Score was used to compare POPF rates across various risk scenarios. RESULTS: 1992 patients were included. Overall POPF rate was 13.1%. Lanreotide (10.0%), octreotide-HR (9.4%) and no protocol (12.7%) POPF rates were lower compared to the other protocols (varying from 15.1 to 19.1%, p = 0.001) in crude analysis. Sub-analysis in patients with HR of POPF showed a significantly lower rate of POPF when treated with lanreotide (10.0%) compared to no protocol, octreotide and pasireotide protocol (21.6-26.9%, p = 0.006). Octreotide-HR and lanreotide-HR protocol POPF rates were comparable to lanreotide protocol, however not significantly different from the other protocols. Multivariable regression analysis demonstrated lanreotide protocol to be positively associated with a low odds-ratio (OR) for POPF (OR 0.387, 95% CI 0.180-0.834, p = 0.015). In-hospital mortality rates were not affected. CONCLUSION: Use of lanreotide in all patients undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy has a potential protective effect on POPF development. Protocols for HR patients only might be favorable too. However, future studies are warranted to confirm these findings.
Asunto(s)
Fístula Pancreática , Pancreaticoduodenectomía , Humanos , Octreótido/uso terapéutico , Páncreas/cirugía , Fístula Pancreática/epidemiología , Fístula Pancreática/etiología , Fístula Pancreática/prevención & control , Pancreaticoduodenectomía/efectos adversos , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/epidemiología , Factores de Riesgo , Somatostatina/uso terapéuticoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Robotic surgery may improve surgical performance during minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy as compared to 3D- and 2D-laparoscopy but comparative studies are lacking. This study assessed the impact of robotic surgery versus 3D- and 2D-laparoscopy on surgical performance and operative time using a standardized biotissue model for pancreatico- and hepatico-jejunostomy using pooled data from two randomized controlled crossover trials (RCTs). METHODS: Pooled analysis of data from two RCTs with 60 participants (36 surgeons, 24 residents) from 11 countries (December 2017-July 2019) was conducted. Each included participant completed two pancreatico- and two hepatico-jejunostomies in biotissue using 3D-robotic surgery, 3D-laparoscopy, or 2D-laparoscopy. Primary outcomes were the objective structured assessment of technical skills (OSATS: 12-60) rating, scored by observers blinded for 3D/2D and the operative time required to complete both anastomoses. Sensitivity analysis excluded participants with excess experience compared to others. RESULTS: A total of 220 anastomoses were completed (robotic 80, 3D-laparoscopy 70, 2D-laparoscopy 70). Participants in the robotic group had less surgical experience [median 1 (0-2) versus 6 years (4-12), p < 0.001], as compared to the laparoscopic group. Robotic surgery resulted in higher OSATS ratings (50, 43, 39 points, p = .021 and p < .001) and shorter operative time (56.5, 65.0, 81.5 min, p = .055 and p < .001), as compared to 3D- and 2D-laparoscopy, respectively, which remained in the sensitivity analysis. CONCLUSION: In a pooled analysis of two RCTs in a biotissue model, robotic surgery resulted in better surgical performance scores and shorter operative time for biotissue pancreatic and biliary anastomoses, as compared to 3D- and 2D-laparoscopy.
Asunto(s)
Laparoscopía , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Robotizados , Competencia Clínica , Humanos , Imagenología Tridimensional/métodos , Laparoscopía/métodos , Pancreaticoduodenectomía/métodos , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Robotizados/métodosRESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Widespread differences in patient demographics and disease burden between hospitals for resection of colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) have been described. In the Netherlands, networks consisting of at least one tertiary referral centre and several regional hospitals have been established to optimize treatment and outcomes. The aim of this study was to assess variation in case-mix, and outcomes between these networks. METHODS: This was a population-based study including all patients who underwent CRLM resection in the Netherlands between 2014 and 2019. Variation in case-mix and outcomes between seven networks covering the whole country was evaluated. Differences in case-mix, expected 30-day major morbidity (Clavien-Dindo ≥3a) and 30-day mortality between networks were assessed. RESULTS: In total 5383 patients were included. Thirty-day major morbidity was 5.7% and 30-day mortality was 1.5%. Significant differences between networks were observed for Charlson Comorbidity Index, ASA 3+, previous liver resection, liver disease, preoperative MRI, preoperative chemotherapy, ≥3 CRLM, diameter of largest CRLM ≥55 mm, major resection, combined resection and ablation, rectal primary tumour, bilobar and extrahepatic disease. Uncorrected 30-day major morbidity ranged between 3.3% and 13.1% for hospitals, 30-day mortality ranged between 0.0% and 4.5%. Uncorrected 30-day major morbidity ranged between 4.4% and 6.0% for networks, 30-day mortality ranged between 0.0% and 2.5%. No negative outliers were observed after case-mix correction. CONCLUSION: Variation in case-mix and outcomes are considerably smaller on a network level as compared to a hospital level. Therefore, auditing is more meaningful at a network level and collaboration of hospitals within networks should be pursued.
Asunto(s)
Carcinoma/cirugía , Neoplasias Colorrectales/patología , Hepatectomía , Neoplasias Hepáticas/cirugía , Metastasectomía , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/epidemiología , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Carcinoma/secundario , Grupos Diagnósticos Relacionados , Femenino , Planificación Hospitalaria , Hospitales , Humanos , Neoplasias Hepáticas/secundario , Imagen por Resonancia Magnética , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Mortalidad , Terapia Neoadyuvante , Países Bajos , Centros de Atención TerciariaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The optimal treatment sequence for patients with synchronous colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) remains uncertain. This study aimed to assess factors associated with the use of simultaneous resections and impact on hospital variation. METHOD: This population-based study included all patients who underwent liver surgery for synchronous colorectal liver metastases between 2014 and 2019 in the Netherlands. Factors associated with simultaneous resection were identified. Short-term surgical outcomes of simultaneous resections and factors associated with 30-day major morbidity were evaluated. RESULTS: Of 2146 patients included, 589 (27%) underwent simultaneous resection in 28 hospitals. Simultaneous resection was associated with age, sex, BMI, number, size and bilobar distribution of CRLM, and administration of preoperative chemotherapy. More minimally invasive and minor resections were performed in the simultaneous group. Hospital variation was present (range 2.4%-83.3%) with several hospitals performing simultaneous procedures more and less frequently than expected. Simultaneous resection resulted in 13% 30-day major morbidity, and 1% mortality. ASA classification ≥3 was independently associated with higher 30-day major morbidity after simultaneous resection (aOR 1.97, CI 1.10-3.42, p = 0.018). CONCLUSION: Distinctive patient and tumour characteristics influence the choice for simultaneous resection. Remarkable hospital variation is present in the Netherlands.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias Colorrectales , Neoplasias Hepáticas , Neoplasias Colorrectales/patología , Hepatectomía/efectos adversos , Hepatectomía/métodos , Hospitales , Humanos , Neoplasias Hepáticas/secundario , Estudios Retrospectivos , Factores de Tiempo , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Failure to rescue (FTR) is defined as postoperative complications leading to mortality. This nationwide study aimed to assess factors associated with FTR and hospital variation in FTR after liver surgery. METHODS: All patients who underwent liver resection between 2014 and 2017 in the Netherlands were included. FTR was defined as in-hospital or 30-day mortality after complications Dindo grade ≥3a. Variables associated with FTR and nationwide hospital variation were assessed using multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: Of 4961 patients included, 3707 (74.4%) underwent liver resection for colorectal liver metastases, 379 (7.6%) for other metastases, 526 (10.6%) for hepatocellular carcinoma and 349 (7.0%) for biliary cancer. Thirty-day major morbidity was 11.5%. Overall mortality was 2.3%. FTR was 19.1%. Age 65-80 (aOR: 2.86, CI:1.01-12.0, p = 0.049), ASA 3+ (aOR:2.59, CI: 1.66-4.02, p < 0.001), liver cirrhosis (aOR:4.15, CI:1.81-9.22, p < 0.001), biliary cancer (aOR:3.47, CI: 1.73-6.96, p < 0.001), and major resection (aOR:6.46, CI: 3.91-10.9, p < 0.001) were associated with FTR. Postoperative liver failure (aOR: 26.9, CI: 14.6-51.2, p < 0.001), cardiac (aOR: 2.62, CI: 1.27-5.29, p = 0.008) and thromboembolic complications (aOR: 2.49, CI: 1.16-5.22, p = 0.017) were associated with FTR. After case-mix correction, no hospital variation in FTR was observed. CONCLUSION: FTR is influenced by patient demographics, disease and procedural burden. Prevention of postoperative liver failure, cardiac and thromboembolic complications could decrease FTR.
Asunto(s)
Fracaso de Rescate en Atención a la Salud , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Mortalidad Hospitalaria , Hospitales , Humanos , Hígado , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/etiología , Factores de RiesgoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Liver resection is high-risk surgery in particular in elderly patients. The aim of this study was to explore postoperative outcomes after liver resection in elderly patients. METHODS: In this nationwide study, all patients who underwent liver resection for primary and secondary liver tumours in the Netherlands between 2014 and 2019 were included. Age groups were composed as younger than 70 (70-), between 70 and 80 (septuagenarians), and 80 years or older (octogenarians). Proportion of liver resections per age group and 30-day major morbidity and 30-day mortality were assessed. RESULTS: In total, 6587 patients were included of whom 4023 (58.9%) were younger than 70, 2135 (32.4%) were septuagenarians and 429 (6.5%) were octogenarians. The proportion of septuagenarians increased during the study period (aOR:1.06, CI:1.02-1.09, p < 0.001). Thirty-day major morbidity was higher in septuagenarians (11%) and octogenarians (12%) compared to younger patients (9%, p = 0.049). Thirty-day mortality was higher in septuagenarians (4%) and octogenarians (4%) compared to younger patients (2%, p < 0.001). Cardiopulmonary complications occurred more frequently with higher age, liver-specific complications did not. Higher age was associated with higher 30-day morbidity and 30-day mortality in multivariable logistic regression. CONCLUSION: Thirty-day major morbidity and 30-day mortality are higher after liver resection in elderly patients, attributed mainly to non-surgical cardiopulmonary complications.
Asunto(s)
Hígado , Octogenarios , Factores de Edad , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Humanos , Países Bajos , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/etiología , Estudios RetrospectivosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Data on surgical outcomes of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) versus open liver resection (OLR) of benign liver tumour (BLT) are scarce. This study aimed to provide a nationwide overview of postoperative outcomes after LLR and OLR of BLT. METHODS: This was a nationwide retrospective study including all patients who underwent liver resection for hepatocellular adenoma, haemangioma and focal nodular hyperplasia in the Netherlands from 2014 to 2019. Propensity score matching (PSM) was applied to compare 30-day overall and major morbidity and 30-day mortality after OLR and LLR. RESULTS: In total, 415 patients underwent BLT resection of whom 230 (55.4%) underwent LLR. PSM for OLR and LLR resulted in 250 matched patients. Median (IQR) length of stay was shorter after LLR than OLR (4 versus 6 days, 5.0-8.0, p < 0.001). Postoperative 30-day overall morbidity was lower after LLR than OLR (12.0% vs. 22.4%, p = 0.043). LLR was associated with reduced 30-day overall morbidity in multivariable analysis (aOR:0.46, CI:0.22-0.95, p = 0.043). Both 30-day major morbidity and 30-day mortality were not different. CONCLUSIONS: LLR for BLT is associated with shorter hospital stay and reduced overall morbidity and is preferred if technically feasible.
Asunto(s)
Carcinoma Hepatocelular , Laparoscopía , Neoplasias Hepáticas , Carcinoma Hepatocelular/cirugía , Hepatectomía/efectos adversos , Humanos , Laparoscopía/efectos adversos , Tiempo de Internación , Neoplasias Hepáticas/cirugía , Países Bajos , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/etiología , Estudios Retrospectivos , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: We tested the added value of 3D-vision on procedure time and surgical performance during robotic pancreatoduodenectomy anastomoses in biotissue. Robotic surgery has the advantage of articulating instruments and 3D-vision. Consensus is lacking on the added value of 3D-vision during laparoscopic surgery. Given the improved dexterity with robotic surgery, the added value of 3D-vision may be even less with robotic surgery. METHODS: In this experimental randomized controlled cross-over trial, 20 surgeons and surgical residents from 5 countries performed robotic pancreaticojejunostomy and hepaticojejunostomy anastomoses in a biotissue organ model using the da Vinci® system and were randomized to start with either 3D- or 2D-vision. Primary endpoint was the time required to complete both anastomoses. Secondary endpoint was the objective structured assessment of technical skill (OSATS; range 12-60) rating; scored by two observers blinded to 3D/2D. RESULTS: Robotic 3D-vision reduced the combined operative time from 78.1 to 57.3 min (24.6% reduction, p < 0.001; 20.8 min reduction, 95% confidence intervals 12.8-28.8 min). This reduction was consistent for both anastomoses and between surgeons and residents, p < 0.001. Robotic 3D-vision improved OSATS performance by 6.1 points (20.8% improvement, p = 0.003) compared to 2D (39.4 to 45.1 points, ± 5.5). CONCLUSION: 3D-vision has a considerable added value during robotic pancreatoduodenectomy anastomoses in biotissue in both time reduction and improved surgical performance as compared to 2D-vision.
Asunto(s)
Laparoscopía , Pancreaticoduodenectomía , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Robotizados , Robótica , Adulto , Estudios Cruzados , Femenino , Humanos , MasculinoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Differences in patient demographics and disease burden can influence comparison of hospital performances. This study aimed to provide a case-mix model to compare short-term postoperative outcomes for patients undergoing liver resection for colorectal liver metastases (CRLM). METHODS: This retrospective, population-based study included all patients who underwent liver resection for CRLM between 2014 and 2018 in the Netherlands. Variation in case-mix variables between hospitals and influence on postoperative outcomes was assessed using multivariable logistic regression. Primary outcomes were 30-day major morbidity and 30-day mortality. Validation of results was performed on the data from 2019. RESULTS: In total, 4639 patients were included in 28 hospitals. Major morbidity was 6.2% and mortality was 1.4%. Uncorrected major morbidity ranged from 3.3% to 13.7% and mortality ranged from 0.0% to 5.0%. between hospitals. Significant differences between hospitals were observed for age higher than 80 (0.0%-17.1%, pâ¯<â¯0.001), ASA 3 or higher (3.3%-36.3%, pâ¯<â¯0.001), histopathological parenchymal liver disease (0.0%-47.1%, pâ¯<â¯0.001), history of liver resection (8.1%-36.3%, pâ¯<â¯0.001), major liver resection (6.7%-38.0%, pâ¯<â¯0.001) and synchronous metastases (35.5%-62.1%, pâ¯<â¯0.001). Expected 30-day major morbidity between hospitals ranged from 6.4% to 11.9% and expected 30-day mortality ranged from 0.6% to 2.9%. After case-mix correction no significant outliers concerning major morbidity and mortality remained. Validation on patients who underwent liver resection for CRLM in 2019 affirmed these outcomes. CONCLUSION: Case-mix adjustment is a prerequisite to allow for institutional comparison of short-term postoperative outcomes after liver resection for CRLM.