Multivisceral and extended resections during pancreatoduodenectomy increase morbidity and mortality.

BACKGROUND: Improvements in outcomes after pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) have permitted more complex resections. Complete extirpation at PD may require multivisceral resection (MVR-PD); however, descriptions of morbidity of MVR-PD are limited to small, single-institution series. METHODS: The National Surgical Quality Improvement Project database (2005-2011) was used to compare 30-day postoperative morbidity of PD with MVR-PD. Concurrent resection of colon, small bowel, stomach, kidney, or adrenal gland defined MVR-PD. RESULTS: Of 9,927 PDs, MVR-PD was performed in 273 patients (3%). MVR included colon (58%), small bowel (30%), and gastric (12%) resections. Preoperative comorbidities were similar between groups. Pancreatic, duodenal, or periampullary cancer was present in 75% of patients. Mortality (8.8% vs 2.9%) and major morbidity (56.8% vs 30.8%) were much greater for MVR-PD versus PD alone (P < .001). MVR-PD patients also experienced greater rates of wound, pulmonary, cardiac, thromboembolic, renal, and septic complications. On multivariable regression, MVR was an independent predictor of death (odds ratio [OR], 3.4; P < .001), overall morbidity (OR, 3.01; P < .001), major morbidity (OR, 3.21; P < .001), and minor morbidity (OR, 1.65; P = .03). Among patients undergoing PD+MVR, colectomy was an independent predictor of increased overall morbidity (OR, 1.96; P = .03) and major morbidity (OR, 1.90; P = .02). CONCLUSION: Margin-negative resection may require MVRs at the time of PD. MVR at is associated with 3-fold mortality and substantial morbidity after adjusting for comorbidities. Colectomy independently predicted major morbidity. At PD, the morbidity of MVR should be approached with caution when attempting margin-negative resection.

Do patients' outcomes suffer when surgical fellows are involved in hepatic resection?

INTRODUCTION: Hepatectomy is an advanced technique learned during surgical fellowship. Outcomes have not been described for hepatectomies involving fellows. METHODS: We analyzed hepatectomies from the 2005-2011 National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database. We compared cases with a fellow (FELLOW group) and those without a fellow (ATTENDING group). RESULTS: FELLOW cases (n = 1,562; 54%) included more major hepatectomies and more metastasectomies (P < .002). Mortality was 3.2% versus 2.7% (P = .5) and morbidity was 30.7% vs 26.2% (P = .008) for FELLOW versus ATTENDING cases. On multivariate analysis, mortality was similar, but morbidity was greater in FELLOW cases (odds ratio [OR], 1.21; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.02-1.4; P = .03), with increased superficial surgical site infections (OR, 1.72; 95% CI, 1.2-2.4; P = .001). There were no differences in rates of sepsis, cardiac, pulmonary, or thromboembolic complications. Compared with ATTENDING cases, FELLOW cases during the first half of training, carried greater morbidity (OR, 1.43; 95% CI, 1.1-1.8; P = .006); however, this difference disappears by the second half of the academic year. CONCLUSION: Hepatectomy involving a fellow may be associated with an increased risk of surgical site infections. FELLOW cases were more complex. Mortality, cardiac, pulmonary, and other serious morbidities were similar. Despite slightly greater rates of surgical site infections, training in hepatic surgery maintains excellent patient outcomes.