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

A critical analysis of surgical outcomes indicators in hepato-pancreato-biliary surgery: From crude mortality to composite outcomes

BACKGROUND

Indicators of surgical outcomes are designed to objectively evaluate surgical performance, enabling comparisons among surgeons and institutions. In recent years, there has been a surge in complex indicators of perioperative short-term and long-term outcomes. The aim of this narrative review is to provide an overview and a critical analysis of surgical outcomes indicators, with a special emphasis on hepato-pancreato-biliary (HPB) surgery.

METHODS

A narrative review of outcome measures was conducted using a combined text and MeSH search strategy to identify relevant articles focused on perioperative outcomes, specifically within HPB surgery.

RESULTS

The literature search yielded 624 records, and 94 studies were included in the analysis. Included papers were classified depending on whether they assessed intraoperative or postoperative specific or composite outcomes, and whether they assessed purely clinical or combined clinical and socio-economic indicators. Specific indicators included in composite outcomes were categorized into three main domains: intraoperative metrics, postoperative outcomes, and oncological outcomes. While postoperative mortality, complications, hospital stay and readmission were the indicators most frequently included in composite outcomes, oncological outcomes were rarely considered.

CONCLUSIONS

The evolution of surgical outcomes has shifted from the simplistic assessment of crude mortality rates to complex composite outcomes. Whether the recent explosion of publications on these topics has a clinical impact in real life is questionable. Outcomes from the patient perspective, integrating social and financial indicators, are not yet integrated into most of these composite analytical tools but should not be underestimated.

Quality performance indicators for oesophageal and gastric cancer: ANZ expert Delphi consensus

BACKGROUND

Quality performance indicators for the management of oesophagogastric cancer can be used to objectively measure and compare the performance of individual units and capture key elements of patient care to improve patient outcomes.

METHODS

Two systematic reviews were completed to identify evidence-based quality performance indicators for the surgical management of oesophagogastric cancer. Based on the indicators identified, a two-round modified Delphi process with invitations was sent to all members of the Australia and Aotearoa New Zealand Gastric and Oesophageal Surgery Association. The expert working group discussed each suggested indicator and either removed, added, or adjusted the list of indicators of oesophagogastric cancer.

RESULTS

The final list of both OG cancer indicators included Specialized Multi-disciplinary team discussion, Endoscopy documentation, Staging Contrast CT Chest/Abdomen and Pelvis, Neoadjuvant or Adjuvant chemo/radiotherapy administered in accordance with the Local multi-disciplinary team, Pathological margin clearance (R0 Resection), Lymphadenectomy retrieving 15 or more nodes, Formal review of pathological findings and documentation, Postoperative complications, 30-day and 90-day postoperative mortality, clinical surveillance and Specialized Dietetic guidance. Indicators specific to gastric cancer included Preoperative biopsy for pathological diagnosis and Staging Laparoscopy. Indicators specific to oesophageal cancer include positron emission tomography scan if CT negative for metastasis, Perioperative Oesophagectomy Care Pathway, length of stay of 21 days or more, and Unplanned readmission within 30 days.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this study present a core set of indicators for the surgical management of oesophagogastric cancer that can be used to measure quality and compare performance between different units.

6,126 hepatectomies in 2022: current trend of outcome in Italy

PURPOSE

Whether hospital volume affects outcome of patients undergoing hepatobiliary surgery, and whether the centralization of such procedures is justified remains to be investigated. The aim of this study was to analyze the outcome of liver surgery in Italy in relationship of hospital volume.

METHODS

This is a nationwide retrospective observational study conducted on data collected by the National Italian Registry "Piano Nazionale Esiti" (PNE) 2023 that included all liver procedures performed in 2022. Outcome measure were case volume and 30-day mortality. Hospitals were classified as very high-volume (H-Vol), intermediate-volume (I-Vol), low-volume (L-Vol) and very low-volume (VL-VoL). A review on centralization process and outcome measures was added.

RESULTS

6,126 liver resections for liver tumors were performed in 327 hospitals in 2022. The 30-day mortality was 2.2%. There were 14 H-Vol, 19 I-Vol, 31 L-Vol and 263 VL-Vol hospitals with 30-day mortality of 1.7%, 2.2%, 2.6% and 3.6% respectively (P < 0.001); 220 centers (83%) performed less than 10 resections, and 78 (29%) centers only 1 resection in 2022. By considering the geographical macro-areas, the median count of liver resection performed in northern Italy exceeded those in central and southern Italy (57% vs. 23% vs. 20%, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

High-volume has been confirmed to be associated to better outcome after hepatobiliary surgical procedures. Further studies are required to detail the factors associated with mortality. The centralization process should be redesigned and oversight.

A core set of quality performance indicators for HPB procedures: a global consensus for hepatectomy, pancreatectomy, and complex biliary surgery

BACKGROUND

Surgery for hepatopancreaticobiliary (HPB) conditions is performed worldwide. This investigation aimed to develop a set of globally accepted procedural quality performance indicators (QPI) for HPB surgical procedures.

METHODS

A systematic literature review generated a dataset of published QPI for hepatectomy, pancreatectomy, complex biliary surgery and cholecystectomy. Using a modified Delphi process, three rounds were conducted with working groups composed of self-nominating members of the International Hepatopancreaticobiliary Association (IHPBA). The final set of QPI was circulated to the full membership of the IHPBA for review.

RESULTS

Seven "core" indicators were agreed for hepatectomy, pancreatectomy, and complex biliary surgery (availability of specific services on site, a specialised surgical team with at least two certified HPB surgeons, a satisfactory institutional case volume, synoptic pathology reporting, undertaking of unplanned reintervention procedures within 90 days, the incidence of post-procedure bile leak and Clavien-Dindo grade ≥III complications and 90-day post-procedural mortality). Three further procedure specific QPI were proposed for pancreatectomy, six for hepatectomy and complex biliary surgery. Nine procedure-specific QPIs were proposed for cholecystectomy. The final set of proposed indicators were reviewed and approved by 102 IHPBA members from 34 countries.

CONCLUSIONS

This work presents a core set of internationally agreed QPI for HPB surgery.

Intraductal papillary neoplasms of the bile duct: a European retrospective multicenter observational study (EUR-IPNB study)

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE

Intraductal papillary neoplasm of the bile duct (IPNB) is a rare disease in Western countries. The main aim of this study was to characterize current surgical strategies and outcomes in the mainly European participating centers.

METHODS

A multi-institutional retrospective series of patients with a diagnosis of IPNB undergoing surgery between 1 January 2010 and 31 December 2020 was gathered under the auspices of the European-African Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association. The textbook outcome (TO) was defined as a non-prolonged length of hospital stay plus the absence of any Clavien-Dindo grade at least III complications, readmission, or mortality within 90 postoperative days.

RESULTS

A total of 28 centers contributed 85 patients who underwent surgery for IPNB. The median age was 66 years (55-72), 49.4% were women, and 87.1% were Caucasian. Open surgery was performed in 72 patients (84.7%) and laparoscopic in 13 (15.3%). TO was achieved in 54.1% of patients, reaching 63.8% after liver resection and 32.0% after pancreas resection. Median overall survival was 5.72 years, with 5-year overall survival of 63% (95% CI: 50-82). Overall survival was better in patients with Charlson comorbidity score 4 or less versus more than 4 ( P =0.016), intrahepatic versus extrahepatic tumor ( P =0.027), single versus multiple tumors ( P =0.007), those who underwent hepatic versus pancreatic resection ( P =0.017), or achieved versus failed TO ( P =0.029). Multivariable Cox regression analysis showed that not achieving TO (HR: 4.20; 95% CI: 1.11-15.94; P =0.03) was an independent prognostic factor of poor overall survival.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients undergoing liver resection for IPNB were more likely to achieve a TO outcome than those requiring a pancreatic resection. Comorbidity, tumor location, and tumor multiplicity influenced overall survival. TO was an independent prognostic factor of overall survival.

Quality performance indicators for the surgical treatment of gastric adenocarcinoma: a systematic review

Background

A systematic review was undertaken to identify existing quality performance indicators (QPI) for the surgical treatment of gastric adenocarcinoma (GA) with the aim of defining a set of QPIs that can be used to assist in the accreditation of institutions for training, allow cross jurisdiction comparison of treatment and outcomes, as well as provide a basis to develop quality improvement programs. These QPI's capture key components of patient care that are fundamental to overall outcome.

Methods

A systematic literature review was conducted searching MEDLINE, PubMed, EMBASE, and SCOPUS with all literature available until the date of 1 August 2021 included. Search terms utilized were ‘Quality of health care OR Quality improvement or Quality control OR Quality indicators’, AND ‘Gastrectomy’ OR ‘Stomach neoplasm’ OR ‘Adenocarcinoma’ OR ‘Gastric resection’ OR ‘Gastric cancer’.

Results

Twelve articles were included in the final analysis. The selected studies included editorials (n = 2), retrospective review of institutional experience (n = 5), cohort studies (n = 2), survey methodology (n = 1), expert guidelines (n = 1) and consensus statement (n = 1). For GC QPIs, process measures included patient discussion at multi‐disciplinary meetings, access to perioperative multimodal diagnostic pathways, and specific surgical metrics (margin negative resections and adequate lymphadenectomy). Outcome measures included the RO resection rate, reoperation, readmission rate, and length of hospital stay.

Conclusions

There is a relative paucity of internationally agreed QPI for the surgical management of gastric adenocarcinoma. The data from this review will form the basis of a project to develop internationally agreed and feasible QPI for gastric cancer resections.