Benchmarking outcomes for distal pancreatectomy: critical evaluation of four multicenter studies.

BACKGROUND: Benchmarking is a validated tool for outcome assessment and international comparison of best achievable surgical outcomes. The methodology is increasingly applied in pancreatic surgery and the aim of the review was to critically compare available benchmark studies evaluating distal pancreatectomy (DP). METHODS: A literature search of English articles reporting on benchmarking DP was conducted of the electronic databases MEDLINE and Web of Science (until April 2023). Studies on open (ODP), laparoscopic (LDP), and robotic DP (RDP) were included. RESULTS: Four retrospective multicenter studies were included. Studies reported on outcomes of minimally invasive DP only (n = 2), ODP and LDP (n = 1), and RDP only (n = 1). Either the Achievable Benchmark of Care™ method or the 75th percentile from the median was selected to define benchmark cutoffs. Robust and reproducible benchmark values were provided by the four studies for intra- and postoperative short-term outcomes. CONCLUSION: Benchmarking DP is a valuable tool for obtaining internationally accepted reference outcomes for open and minimally invasive DP approaches with only minor variances in four international cohorts. Benchmark cutoffs allow for outcome comparisons between institutions, surgeons, and to monitor the introduction of novel minimally invasive DP techniques.

INSPIRA: study protocol for a randomized-controlled trial about the effect of spirometry-assisted preoperative inspiratory muscle training on postoperative complications in abdominal surgery.

BACKGROUND: Rehabilitation strategies after abdominal surgery enhance recovery and improve outcome. A cornerstone of rehabilitation is respiratory physiotherapy with inspiratory muscle training to enhance pulmonary function. Pre-habilitation is the process of enhancing functional capacity before surgery in order to compensate for the stress of surgery and postoperative recovery. There is growing interest in deploying pre-habilitation interventions prior to surgery. The aim of this study is to assess the impact of preoperative inspiratory muscle training on postoperative overall morbidity. The question is, whether inspiratory muscle training prior to elective abdominal surgery reduces the number of postoperative complications and their severity grade. METHODS: We describe a prospective randomized-controlled single-centre trial in a tertiary referral centre. The primary outcome is the Comprehensive Complication Index (CCI) at 90 days after surgery. The CCI expresses morbidity on a continuous numeric scale from 0 (no complication) to 100 (death) by weighing all postoperative complications according to the Clavien-Dindo classification for their respective severity. In the intervention group, patients will be instructed by physiotherapists to perform inspiratory muscle training containing of 30 breaths twice a day for at least 2 weeks before surgery using Power®Breathe KHP2. Depending on the surgical schedule, training can be extended up to 6 weeks. In the control group, no preoperative inspiratory muscle training will be performed. After the operation, both groups receive the same physiotherapeutic support. DISCUSSION: Existing data about preoperative inspiratory muscle training on postoperative complications are ambiguous and study protocols are often lacking a clear design and a clearly defined endpoint. Most studies consist of multi-stage concepts, comprehensively supervised and long-term interventions, whose implementation in clinical practice is hardly possible. There is a clear need for randomized-controlled studies with a simple protocol that can be easily transferred into clinical practice. This study examines the effortless adjustment of the common respiratory physiotherapy from currently postoperative to preoperative. The external measurement by the device eliminates the diary listing of patients' performances and allows the exercise adherence and thus the effect to be objectively recorded. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04558151 . Registered on September 15, 2020.

Learning Curves in Open, Laparoscopic, and Robotic Pancreatic Surgery: A Systematic Review and Proposal of a Standardization.

Objective: To depict and analyze learning curves for open, laparoscopic, and robotic pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) and distal pancreatectomy (DP). Background: Formal training is recommended for safe introduction of pancreatic surgery but definitions of learning curves vary and have not been standardized. Methods: A systematic search on PubMed, Web of Science, and CENTRAL databases identified studies on learning curves in pancreatic surgery. Primary outcome was the number needed to reach the learning curve as defined by the included studies. Secondary outcomes included endpoints defining learning curves, methods of analysis (statistical/arbitrary), and classification of learning phases. Results: Out of 1115 articles, 66 studies with 14,206 patients were included. Thirty-five studies (53%) based the learning curve analysis on statistical calculations. Most often used parameters to define learning curves were operative time (n = 51), blood loss (n = 17), and complications (n = 10). The number of procedures to surpass a first phase of learning curve was 30 (20-50) for open PD, 39 (11-60) for laparoscopic PD, 25 (8-100) for robotic PD (P = 0.521), 16 (3-17) for laparoscopic DP, and 15 (5-37) for robotic DP (P = 0.914). In a three-phase model, intraoperative parameters improved earlier (first to second phase: operating time -15%, blood loss -29%) whereas postoperative parameters improved later (second to third phase: complications -46%, postoperative pancreatic fistula -48%). Studies with higher sample sizes showed higher numbers of procedures needed to overcome the learning curve (rho = 0.64, P < 0.001). Conclusions: This study summarizes learning curves for open-, laparoscopic-, and robotic pancreatic surgery with different definitions, analysis methods, and confounding factors. A standardized reporting of learning curves and definition of phases (competency, proficiency, mastery) is desirable and proposed.

Enterothorax After Hepatic Surgery: A Single-Center Experience.

BACKGROUND: Enterothorax (ET) is a rare complication after hepatic surgery. The literature in this field is limited and mainly based on case reports. The aim of this study was to review our department's experience. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed 602 patients who underwent hepatic resection between November 2008 and December 2016. Major hepatic surgery (n = 321) was defined as right or extended right hepatectomy (n = 227), left or extended left hepatectomy (n = 63), trisegmentectomy (n = 13), and living donor liver transplantation (n = 18). ET cases were identified by analyzing clinical courses and radiological imaging. RESULTS: ET was observed in five out of 602 patients (0.8%). All patients developed the complication after major hepatic surgery (five out of 321, 1.6%). ET exclusively occurred after right (n = 3) or extended right hepatectomy (n = 2). Median time to diagnosis was 22 months. Radiological imaging showed herniation of small (n = 2), large bowel (n = 2), or omental fat (n = 1) with a median diaphragmatic defect of 3.9 cm. Two patients presented with acute incarceration and underwent emergency surgery, one patient reported recurrent pain and underwent elective repair, and two patients refused surgery. Follow-up imaging in two operated patients showed no recurrence of ET after 36 and 8 months. CONCLUSIONS: Patients after right hepatectomy have a substantial risk of ET. Acute right upper quadrant pain and/or dyspnea after hepatectomy should be investigated with adequate radiological imaging. Elective surgical repair of ET is recommended to avoid emergency surgery in case of incarceration.