Identifying the Optimal case-volume threshold for pancreatectomy in contemporary practice

Extending Quality Improvement for Pancreatoduodenectomy Within the High-Volume Setting: The Experience Factor

OBJECTIVE

To analyze the association of a surgeon's experience with postoperative outcomes of pancreatoduodenectomies (PDs) when stratified by Fistula Risk Score (FRS).

BACKGROUND

Centralization is now well-established for pancreatic surgery. Nevertheless, the benefits of individual surgeon's experience in high-volume settings remain undefined.

METHODS

Pancreatoduodenectomies performed by 82 surgeons across 18 international specialty institutions (median: 140 PD/year) were analyzed. Surgeon cumulative PD volume was linked with postoperative outcomes through multivariable models, adjusted for patient/operative characteristics and the FRS. Then, surgeon experience was also stratified by the 10, previously defined, most clinically impactful scenarios for clinically relevant pancreatic fistula (CR-POPF) development.

RESULTS

Of 8189 PDs, 18.7% suffered severe complications (Accordion≥3), 4.8% were reoperated upon and 2.2% expired. Although the most experienced surgeons (top-quartile; >525 career PDs) more often operated on riskier cases, their experience was significantly associated with declines in CR-POPF ( P <0.001), severe complications ( P =0.008), reoperations ( P <0.001), and length of stay (LOS) ( P <0.001)-accentuated even more in the most impactful FRS scenarios (2830 patients). Risk-adjusted models indicate male sex, increasing age, ASA class, and FRS, but not surgeon experience, as being associated with severe complications, failure-to-rescue, and mortality. Instead, upper-echelon experience demonstrates significant reductions in CR-POPF (OR 0.66), reoperations (OR 0.64), and LOS (OR 0.65) in moderate-to-high fistula risk circumstances (FRS≥3, 68% of cases).

CONCLUSIONS

At specialty institutions, major morbidity, mortality, and failure-to-rescue are primarily associated with baseline patient characteristics, while cumulative surgical experience impacts pancreatic fistula occurrence and its attendant effects for most higher-risk pancreatoduodenectomies. These data also suggest an extended proficiency curve exists for this operation.

Variation in Hospital Mortality After Complex Cancer Surgery: Patient, Volume, Hospital or Social Determinants?

INTRODUCTION

We sought to define the individual contributions of patient characteristics (PCs), hospital characteristics (HCs), case volume (CV), and social determinants of health (SDoH) on in-hospital mortality (IHM) after complex cancer surgery.

METHODS

The California Department of Health Care Access and Information database identified patients who underwent esophagectomy (ES), pneumonectomy (PN), pancreatectomy (PD), or proctectomy (PR) for a malignant diagnosis between 2010 and 2020. Multi-level multivariable regression was performed to assess the proportion of variance explained by PCs, HCs, CV and SDoH on IHM.

RESULTS

A total of 52,838 patients underwent cancer surgery (ES: n = 2,700, 5.1%; PN: n = 30,822, 58.3%; PD: n = 7530, 14.3%; PR: n = 11,786, 22.3%) across 294 hospitals. The IHM for the overall cohort was 1.7% and varied from 4.4% for ES to 0.8% for PR. On multivariable regression, PCs contributed the most to the variance in IHM (overall: 32.0%; ES: 21.6%; PN: 28.0%; PD: 20.3%; PR: 39.9%). Among the overall cohort, CV contributed 2.4%, HCs contributed 1.3%, and SDoH contributed 1.2% to the variation in IHM. CV was the second highest contributor to IHM among ES (5.3%), PN (5.3%), and PD (5.9%); however, HCs were a more important contributor among patients who underwent PR (8.0%). The unexplained variance in IHM was highest among ES (72.4%), followed by the PD (67.5%) and PN (64.6%) patient groups.

CONCLUSIONS

PCs are the greatest underlying contributor to variations in IHM following cancer surgery. These data highlight the need to focus on optimizing patients and exploring unexplained sources of IHM to improve quality of surgical care.

Understanding Variation in In-hospital Mortality After Major Surgery in the United States

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to quantify the contributions of patient characteristics (PC), hospital structural characteristics (HC), and hospital operative volumes (HOV) to in-hospital mortality (IHM) after major surgery in the United States (US).

BACKGROUND

The volume-outcome relationship correlates higher HOV with decreased IHM. However, IHM after major surgery is multifactorial, and the relative contribution of PC, HC, and HOV to IHM after major surgery is unknown.

STUDY DESIGN

Patients undergoing major pancreatic, esophageal, lung, bladder, and rectal operations between 2006 and 2011 were identified from the Nationwide Inpatient Sample linked to the American Hospital Association survey. Multilevel logistic regression models were constructed using PC, HC, and HOV to calculate attributable variability in IHM for each.

RESULTS

Eighty thousand nine hundred sixty-nine patients across 1025 hospitals were included. Postoperative IHM ranged from 0.9% for rectal to 3.9% for esophageal surgery. Patient characteristics contributed most of the variability in IHM for esophageal (63%), pancreatic (62.9%), rectal (41.2%), and lung (44.4%) operations. HOV explained < 25% of variability for pancreatic, esophageal, lung, and rectal surgery. HC accounted for 16.9% and 17.4% of the variability in IHM for esophageal and rectal surgery. Unexplained variability in IHM was high in the lung (44.3%), bladder (39.3%), and rectal (33.7%) surgery subgroups.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite recent policy focus on the volume-outcome relationship, HOV was not the most important contributor to IHM for the major organ surgeries studied. PC remains the largest identifiable contributor to hospital mortality. Quality improvement initiatives should emphasize patient optimization and structural improvements, in addition to investigating the yet unexplained sources contributing to IHM.

Does the Volume-Outcome Association in Pancreas Cancer Surgery Justify Regionalization of Care? A Review of Current Controversies

INTRODUCTION

Increasing hospital or surgeon volume is associated with improved outcomes among patients with pancreatic cancer. Promotion of regionalized care is based on this volume-outcome association. However, other research has exposed nuances and complexities inherent to this association that should be considered when promoting regionalized care models. We herein provide a critical review of the literature on the volume-outcome association and a discussion of areas of ongoing controversy.

METHODS

A PubMed literature search was conducted for the years 1995-2020. Peer reviewed original research studies were selected for critical review based on study design, potential to draw meaningful conclusions from the data, and discussion of current knowledge gaps.

RESULTS

Based on the cumulative published literature, hospital/surgeon volume and patient mortality are inversely related. However, it remains unclear whether volume is a proxy for other more causative variables inherent in high-volume centers. Interpretation of the volume-outcome association is made more difficult to interpret due to the large variation in the definition of high volume, difficulty in isolating the individual impact of surgeon versus hospital volume, challenges in quantifying health system processes related to volume, and the fact that some low-volume centers consistently achieve excellent clinical results. Implementation of true regionalized care models has been rare, likely reflecting both health system and patient level challenges.

CONCLUSION

The volume-outcome association has been consistently demonstrated to be important to the care of patients with pancreas cancer. The underlying mechanism of this association to explain the overall benefit is likely multifactorial. Better understanding of what drives the volume-outcome association may increase access to optimized care for a broader range of hospital systems and patients.