Practice variation and outcomes of minimally invasive minor liver resections in patients with colorectal liver metastases: a population-based study

Risk factors and outcomes of conversions in robotic and laparoscopic liver resections: A nationwide analysis

BACKGROUND

Unfavorable intraoperative findings or incidents during minimally invasive liver surgery may necessitate conversion to open surgery. This study aimed to identify predictors for conversion in minimally invasive liver surgery and gain insight into outcomes following conversions.

METHODS

This nationwide, retrospective cohort study compared converted and non-converted minimally invasive liver surgery procedures using data from 20 centers in the Dutch Hepatobiliary Audit (2014-2022). Propensity score matching was applied. Subgroup analyses of converted robotic liver resection versus laparoscopic liver resection and emergency versus non-emergency conversions were performed. Predictors for conversions were identified using backward stepwise multivariable logistic regression.

RESULTS

Of 3,530 patients undergoing minimally invasive liver surgery (792 robotic liver resection, 2,738 laparoscopic liver resection), 408 (11.6%) were converted (4.9% robotic liver resection, 13.5% laparoscopic liver resection). Conversion was associated with increased blood loss (580 mL [interquartile range 250-1,200] vs 200 mL [interquartile range 50-500], P < .001), major blood loss (≥500 mL, 58.8% vs 26.7%, P < .001), intensive care admission (19.0% vs 8.4%, P = .005), overall morbidity (38.9% vs 21.0%, P < .001), severe morbidity (17.9% vs 9.6%, P = .002), and a longer hospital stay (6 days [interquartile range 5-8] vs 4 days [interquartile range 2-5], P < .001) but not mortality (2.2% vs 1.2%, P = .387). Emergency conversions had increased intraoperative blood loss (1,500 mL [interquartile range 700-2,800] vs 525 mL [interquartile range 208-1,000], P < .001), major blood loss (87.5% vs 59.3%, P = .005), and intensive care admission (27.9% vs 10.6%, P = .029), compared with non-emergency conversions. Robotic liver resection was linked to lower conversion risk, whereas American Society of Anesthesiologists grade ≥3, larger lesion size, concurrent ablation, technically major, and anatomically major resections were risk factors.

CONCLUSION

Both emergency and non-emergency conversions negatively impact perioperative outcomes in minimally invasive liver surgery. Robotic liver resection reduces conversion risk compared to laparoscopic liver resection.

Assessing quality of hepato-pancreato-biliary surgery: nationwide benchmarking

BACKGROUND

Clinical auditing is a powerful tool to evaluate and improve healthcare. Deviations from the expected quality of care are identified by benchmarking the results of individual hospitals using national averages. This study aimed to evaluate the use of quality indicators for benchmarking hepato-pancreato-biliary (HPB) surgery and when outlier hospitals could be identified.

METHODS

A population-based study used data from two nationwide Dutch HPB audits (DHBA and DPCA) from 2014 to 2021. Sample size calculations determined the threshold (in percentage points) to identify centres as statistical outliers, based on current volume requirements (annual minimum of 20 resections) on a two-year period (2020-2021), covering mortality rate, failure to rescue (FTR), major morbidity rate and textbook/ideal outcome (TO) for minor liver resection (LR), major LR, pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) and distal pancreatectomy (DP).

RESULTS

In total, 10 963 and 7365 patients who underwent liver and pancreatic resection respectively were included. Benchmark and corresponding range of mortality rates were 0.6% (0 -3.2%) and 3.3% (0-16.7%) for minor and major LR, and 2.7% (0-7.0%) and 0.6% (0-4.2%) for PD and DP respectively. FTR rates were 5.4% (0-33.3%), 14.2% (0-100%), 7.5% (1.6%-28.5%) and 3.1% (0-14.9%). For major morbidity rate, corresponding rates were 9.8% (0-20.5%), 28.1% (0-47.1%), 36% (15.8%-58.3%) and 22.3% (5.2%-46.1%). For TO, corresponding rates were 73.6% (61.3%-94.4%), 54.1% (35.3-100), 46.8% (25.3%-59.4%) and 63.3% (30.7%-84.6%). Mortality rate thresholds indicating a significant outlier were 8.6% and 15.4% for minor and major LR and 14.2% and 8.6% for PD and DP. For FTR, these thresholds were 17.9%, 31.6%, 22.9% and 15.0%. For major morbidity rate, these thresholds were 26.1%, 49.7%, 57.9% and 52.9% respectively. For TO, lower thresholds were 52.5%, 32.5%, 25.8% and 41.4% respectively. Higher hospital volumes decrease thresholds to detect outliers.

CONCLUSION

Current event rates and minimum volume requirements per hospital are too low to detect any meaningful between hospital differences in mortality rate and FTR. Major morbidity rate and TO are better candidates to use for benchmarking.

Association of modified textbook outcome and overall survival after surgery for colorectal liver metastases: A nationwide analysis

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.