Estándares de calidad en la cirugía oncológica pancreática en España

Implementation of a regional reference center in pancreatic surgery. Experience after 631 procedures

INTRODUCTION

The main objective of this study is to determine whether our unit meets the quality standards required by the scientific community from the reference centers for pancreatic surgery in terms of peri-operative results. The secondary objectives are to compare the different pancreatic surgery techniques performed in terms of early post-operative morbidity and mortality and to analyze the impact of the resections added in these terms.

METHOD

Descriptive, retrospective and single-center study, corresponding to the period 2006-2019. The results obtained were compared with the proposed quality standards, by Bassi et al. and Sabater et al., required from the reference centers in pancreatic surgery. The sample was divided according to surgical technique and compared in terms of early post-operative morbidity and mortality, studying the impact of extended vascular and visceral resections. All patients undergoing pancreatic surgery in our unit due to pancreatic, malignant and benign pathology were included, since it was implemented as a reference center. Emergency procedures were excluded.

RESULTS

631 patients were analyzed. The values ​​obtained in the quality standards are in range. The most frequent surgery was pancreaticoduodenectomy, which associated higher peri-operative morbidity and mortality rates (P ≤ .05). The extended vascular resections impacted the pancreaticoduodenectomy group, associating a longer mean stay (P = .01) and a higher rate of re-interventions (P = .02).

CONCLUSIONS

The experience accumulated allows to meet the required quality standards, as well as perform extended resections to pancreatectomy with good results in terms of post-operative morbidity and mortality.

Quality Standards for Surgery of Colorectal Peritoneal Metastasis After Cytoreductive Surgery and Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy

BACKGROUND

The standardization of surgical outcomes throughout surgical procedures is mandatory. Cytoreductive surgery with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS + HIPEC) should provide proficient oncological and surgical outcomes.

STUDY DESIGN

The aim of this study was to identify clinically relevant quality indicators and their quality standard, and to determine their acceptable quality limit. A systematic review on cytoreductive results from 2000 to 2018 was performed focusing on clinical guidelines, consensus conferences, and publications. After the selection of quality indicators, a systematic review of indexed references was performed in order to calculate the quality standard for each indicator.

STUDY SELECTION

Unicentric/multicentric series, comparative studies, and clinical trials. Studies were to include outcomes after cytoreduction of colorectal origin and series with more than 50 patients. Quality indicators with at least 10 series were mandatory and objective measurements were also mandatory for inclusion.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

Quality indicators selected were 1- to 5-year survival, overall disease-free survival, 1- to 5-year disease-free survival, complete surgical resection, duration of surgery, length of stay, overall morbimortality, major morbidity, re-intervention, postoperative hemorrhage, intestinal fistula, anastomotic leakage, wound infection, postoperative medical complications, overall recurrence, and failure to rescue.

RESULTS

The most relevant quality indicators and critical quality limits were overall disease-free survival and 5-year overall disease-free survival (14 months and <10 months, and 14% and <4%, respectively), completeness of surgical resection (89% and <80%, respectively), overall mortality (3% and >8%, respectively), overall morbidity (47% and >63%, respectively), failure to rescue (12% and <30%, respectively), reintervention (13 and <22%, respectively), anastomotic leakage (6% and <13%, respectively), and overall recurrence (60% and <74%, respectively).

CONCLUSION

This is the first study to assess quality standards in CRS + HIPEC for colorectal peritoneal metastases. The current data are of particular relevance for future studies to control the variability of this surgery.

Benchmarking Performance in Pancreatic Surgery: a Systematic Review of Published Quality Metrics

BACKGROUND

Pancreatic surgery is performed in relatively few centres. There are validated quality benchmarks for pancreatic surgery, although it remains unclear how published benchmarks compare with each other. This study aimed to systematically review published literature to summarise metrics that define quality benchmarks for pancreatic surgery.

METHOD

A search of MEDLINE, EMBASE and CENTRAL was undertaken until June 2019. Articles that developed or validated published quality benchmarks for pancreatic surgery were included. Benchmarks were classified into three domains using the Donabedian framework, and their quality assessed using the AIRE Instrument.

RESULTS

Nineteen studies included 55 quality metrics, of which 8 developed new metrics, and 11 studies validated previously published metrics. The methodology of metric development was either expert opinion-driven or data-driven. All metrics demonstrated moderate quality scores. There was partial agreement in some metrics (e.g. < 10 h total operative duration), but lack of consensus for most others (e.g. lymph node yield ≥ 10, ≥ 12, ≥ 15, ≥ 16). No metrics related to patient reported outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Published quality benchmarks for pancreatic surgery predominantly arise from eight studies, with heterogeneity in how the metrics were developed. There was not consensus for all metrics. Metrics need to be reviewed as new data emerge, technologies develop and opinions change.

Quality performance indicators for hepato-pancreatico-biliary procedures: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

This systematic review was undertaken to define and summarize existing, proposed quality performance indicators (QPI) for hepato-pancreatico-biliary (HPB) procedures.

METHODS

A systematic literature review identified studies reporting on quality indicators for cholecystectomy, hepatectomy, pancreatectomy and complex biliary surgical procedures. The databases searched were MEDLINE, EMBASE, PubMed, and SCOPUS, with all literature available until the search date of 1 May 2020 included. The reference lists of all included papers, as well as related review articles, were manually searched to identify further relevant studies.

RESULTS

Forty-five publications report quality indicators for pancreatectomy (n = 22), hepatectomy (n = 7), HPB resections in general (n = 12), and cholecystectomy (n = 6). No publications proposed QPI for complex biliary surgery. The 45 papers used national audit (n = 18), consensus methodology (n = 5), state-wide audit (n = 3), unit audit (n = 9), review methodology (n = 9), and survey methodology (n = 1). Sixty-one QPI were reported for pancreatectomy, 22 reported for hepatectomy, and 14 reported for HPB resections in general, in domains of infrastructure, provider, and documentation. Fourteen infrastructure and provider-based QPI were reported for cholecystectomy.

CONCLUSIONS

There are few internationally agreed QPI for HPB procedures that allow global comparison of provider performance and that set aspirational goals for patient care and experience.

Implementation of a regional reference center in pancreatic surgery. Experience after 631 procedures

INTRODUCTION

The main objective of this study is to determine if our unit meets the quality standards required by the scientific community from the reference centers for pancreatic surgery in terms of peri-operative results. The secondary objectives are to compare the different pancreatic surgery techniques performed in terms of early post-operative morbidity and mortality and to analyze the impact of the resections added in these terms.

METHOD

Descriptive, retrospective and single-center study, corresponding to the period 2006-2019. The results obtained were compared with the proposed quality standards, by Bassi et al. and Sabater et al., required from the reference centers in pancreatic surgery. The sample was divided according to surgical technique and compared in terms of early post-operative morbidity and mortality, studying the impact of extended vascular and visceral resections. All patients undergoing pancreatic surgery in our unit due to pancreatic, malignant and benign pathology were included, since it was implemented as a reference center. Emergency procedures were excluded.

RESULTS

631 patients were analyzed. The values ??obtained in the quality standards are in range. The most frequent surgery was cephalic duodenopancreatectomy, which associated higher peri-operative morbidity and mortality rates (p ≤ 0.05). The extended vascular resections impacted the cephalic duodenopancreatectomy group, associating a longer mean stay (p = 0.01) and a higher rate of re-interventions (p = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

The experience accumulated allows to meet the required quality standards, as well as perform extended resections to pancreatectomy with good results in terms of post-operative morbi-mortality.

Survival, morbidity and mortality of pancreatic adenocarcinoma after pancreaticoduodenectomy with a total mesopancreas excision

INTRODUCTION

pancreatic adenocarcinoma is the most common malignancy in the periampullary region, with a five-year survival rate around 20%.

OBJECTIVE

the goal of our study was to determine the survival and safety data of a number of patients that underwent a cephalic duodenopancreatectomy (CDP) with total mesopancreas excision (TMPE).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

a prospective observational study was performed of 114 patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma who underwent duodenopancreatectomy and TMPE over the period 2008-2017. Demographic variables, tumor stage, number of lymph nodes excised, lymph node ratio, R classification, the prognostic factor disease-free interval and survival were all assessed in a multivariate analysis.

RESULTS

complications were reported for 54 (47.3%) patients, of which 22 (19.3%) were categorized as serious. The mortality rate was 4.3% and the mean follow-up was 26.2 months. During this period, 73 (64%) patients relapsed after a mean interval of 40.9 months. The relapse pattern was mainly hepatic (26.3%), followed by local relapse (20%). Mean survival was 40.38 and actuarial survival was 26.6% at five years. Relapse-related factors included stage T3 or higher (RR 8.1 [1.1-61]) and an R1 resection (RR 13.4 [2.7-66.5]) and survival-related factors included an R1 resection (RR 10.7 [2.5-46.2]).

CONCLUSION

TMPE ensures an adequate lymphadenectomy and lymph node ratio according to reported standards. The survival of patients that have undergone surgery for pancreatic adenocarcinoma in our institution is 68.4% at one year and 26.6% at five years. An R1 resection is the primary factor for both relapse and survival.