Benchmark performance of laparoscopic left lateral sectionectomy and right hepatectomy in expert centers

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.

Minimally invasive approach for retrorectal tumors above and below S3: a multicentric tertiary center retrospective study (MiaRT study)

BACKGROUND

Retrorectal tumors are uncommon lesions developed in the retrorectal space. Data on their minimally invasive resection are scarce and the optimal surgical approach for tumors below S3 remains debated.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective review of consecutive patients who underwent minimally invasive resection of retrorectal tumors between 2005 and 2022 at two tertiary university hospital centers, by comparing the results obtained for lesions located above or below S3.

RESULTS

Of over 41 patients identified with retrorectal tumors, surgical approach was minimally invasive for 23 patients, with laparoscopy alone in 19, with transanal excision in 2, and with combined approach in 2. Retrorectal tumor was above S3 in 11 patients (> S3 group) and below S3 in 12 patients (< S3 group). Patient characteristics and median tumor size were not significantly different between the two groups (60 vs 67 mm; p = 0.975). Overall median operative time was 131.5 min and conversion rate was 13% without significant difference between the two groups (126 vs 197 min and 18% vs 8%, respectively; p > 0.05). Final pathology was tailgut cyst (48%), schwannoma (22%), neural origin tumor (17%), gastrointestinal stromal tumor (4%), and other (19%). The 90-day complication rates were 27% and 58% in the > S3 and < S3 groups, respectively, without severe morbidity or mortality. After a median follow-up of 3.3 years, no recurrence was observed in both groups. Three patients presented chronic pain, three anal dysfunction, and three urinary dysfunction. All were successfully managed without reintervention.

CONCLUSIONS

Minimally invasive surgery for retrorectal tumors can be performed safely and effectively with low morbidity and no mortality. Laparoscopic and transanal techniques alone or in combination may be recommended as the treatment of choice of benign retrorectal tumors, even for lesions below S3, in centers experienced with minimally invasive surgery.

Benchmarks in Liver Resection for Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma

INTRODUCTION

Benchmarking in surgery has been proposed as a means to compare results across institutions to establish best practices. We sought to define benchmark values for hepatectomy for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC) across an international population.

METHODS

Patients who underwent liver resection for ICC between 1990 and 2020 were identified from an international database, including 14 Eastern and Western institutions. Patients operated on at high-volume centers who had no preoperative jaundice, ASA class <3, body mass index <35 km/m2, without need for bile duct or vascular resection were chosen as the benchmark group.

RESULTS

Among 1193 patients who underwent curative-intent hepatectomy for ICC, 600 (50.3%) were included in the benchmark group. Among benchmark patients, median age was 58.0 years (interquartile range [IQR] 49.0-67.0), only 28 (4.7%) patients received neoadjuvant therapy, and most patients had a minor resection (n = 499, 83.2%). Benchmark values included ≥3 lymph nodes retrieved when lymphadenectomy was performed, blood loss ≤600 mL, perioperative blood transfusion rate ≤42.9%, and operative time ≤339 min. The postoperative benchmark values included TOO achievement ≥59.3%, positive resection margin ≤27.5%, 30-day readmission ≤3.6%, Clavien-Dindo III or more complications ≤14.3%, and 90-day mortality ≤4.8%, as well as hospital stay ≤14 days.

CONCLUSIONS

Benchmark cutoffs targeting short-term perioperative outcomes can help to facilitate comparisons across hospitals performing liver resection for ICC, assess inter-institutional variation, and identify the highest-performing centers to improve surgical and oncologic outcomes.

Comparing indications, complexity and outcomes of laparoscopic liver resection between centers with and without a liver transplant program: a French nationwide study

BACKGROUND

There are no data to evaluate the difference in populations and impact of centers with liver transplant programs in performing laparoscopic liver resection (LLR).

METHODS

This was a multicenter study including patients undergoing LLR for benign and malignant tumors at 27 French centers from 1996 to 2018. The main outcomes were postoperative severe morbidity and mortality.

RESULTS

A total of 3154 patients were included, and 14 centers were classified as transplant centers (N = 2167 patients, 68.7 %). The transplant centers performed more difficult LLRs and more resections for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in patients who more frequently had cirrhosis. A higher rate of performing the Pringle maneuver, a lower rate of blood loss and a higher rate of open conversion (all p < 0.05) were observed in the transplant centers. There was no association between the presence of a liver transplant program and either postoperative severe morbidity (<10 % in each group; p = 0.228) or mortality (1 % in each group; p = 0.915).

CONCLUSIONS

Most HCCs, difficult LLRs, and cirrhotic patients are treated in transplant centers. We show that all centers can achieve comparable safety and quality of care in LLR independent of the presence of a liver transplant program.

Achieving Textbook Outcomes after Laparoscopic Resection in Posterosuperior Segments of the Liver: The Impact of the Learning Curve

Achieving textbook outcomes (TOs) improves the short-term and long-term performance of a hospital. Our objective was to assess TOs in the laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) of tumors in the PS (posterosuperior) section of the liver and identify the impact of the learning curve. We conducted a retrospective cohort study analyzing patients who underwent LLR for lesions located in the PS segments. Patients were divided into a TO and no-TO group. TOs were defined as negative margins, no transfusion, no readmission, no major complications, no 30-day mortality, and a length of stay ≤ 50th percentile. Patients' outcomes were assessed in two study periods before and after 2015. TOs were achieved in 47.6% (n = 117). In multivariable analysis, obesity (p = 0.001), shorter operation time (p < 0.001), less blood loss (p < 0.001), normal albumin (p = 0.003), and minor resection (p = 0.046) were significantly associated with achieving TOs. Although the 5-year recurrence-free survival rate (p = 0.096) was not significantly different, the 5-year overall survival rate was significantly greater in the TO group (p = 0.001). Body mass index > 25 kg/m2 (p = 0.020), age > 65 years (p = 0.049), and achievement of TOs (p = 0.024) were independently associated with survival. The proportion of patients who achieved a TO was higher after 2015 than before 2015 (52.3% vs. 36.1%; p = 0.022). TOs are important markers not only for assessing hospital and surgeon performance but also as predictors of overall survival. As the number of surgeons who achieve the learning curve increases, the number of patients with TOs will gradually increase with a subsequent improvement in overall survival.

Early adoption of laparoscopic liver surgery in Poland: a national retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

The need for safe and efficient dissemination of minimally invasive approach in liver surgery is among the current challenges for hepatobiliary surgeons. After the stage of innovators and pioneers, the following countries should adopt a laparoscopic approach. The aim of this study was to assess the national experience and trend in implementing laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) in Poland.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A national registry of LLR performed in Poland was established in June 2020. All LLR cases performed before were included retrospectively, followed by prospectively collected new cases. Baseline characteristics, preoperative and intraoperative data, short-term results and long-term follow-up were recorded.

RESULTS

Since 2010 up to the end of 2022 there were 718 LLRs performed in Poland. The national rate of laparoscopic approach has gradually increased since 2017 ( P <0.001), reaching the rate of 11.7% in 2022. There were 443 (61.7%), 107 (14.9%), and 168 (23.4%) LLRs performed in accordance to increasing grades of difficulty. The move towards more demanding cases had an increasing trend over the years ( P <0.001). Total intraoperative adverse event and postoperative severe complications rates were estimated for 13.5% ( n =97) and 6.7% ( n =48), respectively. 30-day reoperation, readmission and postoperative mortality rates were 3.6% ( n =26), 2.8% ( n =20), and 0.8% ( n =6), respectively. While the R0 resection margin was assessed in 643 (89.6%) cases, the total textbook outcomes (TO) were achieved in 525 (74.5%) cases. Overcoming the learning curve of 60 LLRs, resulted in an increasing TO rate from 72.3 to 80.6% ( P =0.024).

CONCLUSIONS

It is the first national analysis of a laparoscopic approach in liver surgery in Poland. An increasing trend of minimizing invasiveness in liver resection has been observed. Responsible selection of cases in accordance with difficulty may provide results within global benchmark values and textbook outcomes already during the learning curve.

An attempt to establish and apply global benchmarks for liver resection of malignant hepatic tumors

BACKGROUND

Benchmarking is a process of continuous self-evaluation and comparison with best-in-class hospitals to guide quality improvement initiatives. We sought to define global benchmarks relative to liver resection for malignancy and to assess their achievement in hospitals in the United States.

METHODS

Patients who underwent curative-intent liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma, intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma, or colorectal or neuroendocrine liver metastases between 2000 and 2019 were identified from an international multi-institutional database. Propensity score matching was conducted to balance baseline characteristics between open and minimally invasive approaches. Best-in-class hospitals were defined relative to the achievement rate of textbook oncologic outcomes and case volume. Benchmark values were established relative to best-in-class institutions. The achievement of benchmark values among hospitals in the National Cancer Database was then assessed.

RESULTS

Among 2,624 patients treated at 20 centers, a majority underwent liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma (n = 1,609, 61.3%), followed by colorectal liver metastases (n = 650, 24.8%), intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (n = 299, 11.4%), and neuroendocrine liver metastases (n = 66, 2.5%). Notably, 1,947 (74.2%) patients achieved a textbook oncologic outcome. After propensity score matching, 6 best-in-class hospitals with the highest textbook oncologic outcome rates (≥75.0%) were identified. Benchmark values were calculated for margin positivity (≤11.7%), 30-day readmission (≤4.1%), 30-day mortality (≤1.6%), minor postoperative complications (≤24.7%), severe complications (≤12.4%), and failure to achieve the textbook oncologic outcome (≤22.8%). Among the National Cancer Database hospitals, global benchmarks for margin positivity, 30-day readmission, 30-day mortality, severe complications, and textbook oncologic outcome failure were achieved in 62.9%, 27.1%, 12.1%, 7.1%, and 29.3% of centers, respectively.

CONCLUSION

These global benchmarks may help identify hospitals that may benefit from quality improvement initiatives, aiming to improve patient safety and surgical oncologic outcomes.

Performance evaluation of a North American center using the established global benchmark for laparoscopic liver resections: A retrospective study

BACKGROUND

The global benchmark cut-offs were set for laparoscopic liver resection procedures: left lateral sectionectomy, left hepatectomy, and right hepatectomy. We aimed to compare the performance of our North American center with the established global benchmarks.

METHODS

This is a single-center study of adults who underwent laparoscopic liver resection between 2010 to 2022 at the Toronto General Hospital. Fourteen benchmarking outcomes were assessed: operation time, intraoperative blood transfusion, estimated blood loss, blood loss ≥500 mL, blood loss ≥1000mL, open-conversion, postoperative length of stay, return to operation, postoperative morbidity, postoperative major-morbidity, 30-day mortality, 90-day mortality, R1 resection, and failure to rescue. Low-risk benchmark cases were defined as follows: patients aged 18 to 70 years, American Society of Anesthesiologist score ≤ 2, tumor size <10 cm, and Child-Pugh score ≤A. Cases involving bilio-enteric anastomosis, hilar dissection, or concomitant major procedures were excluded from the low-risk category. Cases that did not meet the criteria for low-risk selection were considered high-risk cases.

RESULTS

A total of 178 laparoscopic liver resection cases were analyzed (109 left lateral sectionectomies, 45 left hepatectomies, 24 right hepatectomies). Forty-four (25%) cases qualified as low-risk cases (23 left lateral sectionectomies, 16 left hepatectomies, 5 right hepatectomies). The postoperative major morbidity and 90-day mortality after left lateral sectionectomy, left hepatectomy, and right hepatectomy for the low-risk cases were 0%, 0%, and 0%, and 0%, 0%, and 0%, respectively. For the high-risk cases post-2017, the outcomes in the same order were 0%, 0%, and 12%; 0%, 0%, and 0%, respectively. For the high-risk cases operated pre2017, the outcomes in the same order were 9%∗, 16%∗, and 18%; 2%∗, 0%, and 9%∗ (asterisks indicate not meeting the global cut-off), respectively.

CONCLUSION

A North American center was able to achieve outcomes comparable to the established global benchmark for laparoscopic liver resection.

Propensity-score Matched and Coarsened-exact Matched Analysis Comparing Robotic and Laparoscopic Major Hepatectomies: An International Multicenter Study of 4822 Cases

OBJECTIVE

To compare the outcomes between robotic major hepatectomy (R-MH) and laparoscopic major hepatectomy (L-MH).

BACKGROUND

Robotic techniques may overcome the limitations of laparoscopic liver resection. However, it is unknown whether R-MH is superior to L-MH.

METHODS

This is a post hoc analysis of a multicenter database of patients undergoing R-MH or L-MH at 59 international centers from 2008 to 2021. Data on patient demographics, center experience volume, perioperative outcomes, and tumor characteristics were collected and analyzed. Both 1:1 propensity-score matched (PSM) and coarsened-exact matched (CEM) analyses were performed to minimize selection bias between both groups.

RESULTS

A total of 4822 cases met the study criteria, of which 892 underwent R-MH and 3930 underwent L-MH. Both 1:1 PSM (841 R-MH vs. 841 L-MH) and CEM (237 R-MH vs. 356 L-MH) were performed. R-MH was associated with significantly less blood loss {PSM:200.0 [interquartile range (IQR):100.0, 450.0] vs 300.0 (IQR:150.0, 500.0) mL; P = 0.012; CEM:170.0 (IQR: 90.0, 400.0) vs 200.0 (IQR:100.0, 400.0) mL; P = 0.006}, lower rates of Pringle maneuver application (PSM: 47.1% vs 63.0%; P < 0.001; CEM: 54.0% vs 65.0%; P = 0.007) and open conversion (PSM: 5.1% vs 11.9%; P < 0.001; CEM: 5.5% vs 10.4%, P = 0.04) compared with L-MH. On subset analysis of 1273 patients with cirrhosis, R-MH was associated with a lower postoperative morbidity rate (PSM: 19.5% vs 29.9%; P = 0.02; CEM 10.4% vs 25.5%; P = 0.02) and shorter postoperative stay [PSM: 6.9 (IQR: 5.0, 9.0) days vs 8.0 (IQR: 6.0 11.3) days; P < 0.001; CEM 7.0 (IQR: 5.0, 9.0) days vs 7.0 (IQR: 6.0, 10.0) days; P = 0.047].

CONCLUSIONS

This international multicenter study demonstrated that R-MH was comparable to L-MH in safety and was associated with reduced blood loss, lower rates of Pringle maneuver application, and conversion to open surgery.

Open Versus Laparoscopic Right Hepatectomy for Hepatocellular Carcinoma Following Sequential TACE-PVE: A Multicentric Comparative Study

BACKGROUND

Right hepatectomy (RH) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is ideally preceded by transcatheter arterial chemoembolization (TACE) and portal vein embolization (PVE). Laparoscopic approach improves short-term outcome and textbook outcome (TO), which reflects the "ideal" surgical outcome, after RH. However, laparoscopic RH on an underlying diseased liver and after TACE/PVE remains a challenging procedure. The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes in patients who underwent laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) or open liver resection (OLR) following TACE/PVE.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

All patients with HCC who underwent RH after TACE/PVE in five French centers were retrospectively included. Outcomes were compared between the LLR group and the OLR group using propensity score matching (PSM). Quality of surgical care was defined by TO.

RESULTS

Between 2005 and 2019, 117 patients were included (41 in LLR group, 76 in OLR group). Overall morbidity was comparable (51% versus 53%, p = 0.24). In LLR group, TO was completed in 66% versus 37% in OLR group (p = 0.02). LLR and absence of clamping were the only factors associated with TO completion [hazard ratio (HR) 4.27, [1.77-10.28], p = 0.001]. After PSM, 5-year overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were 55% in matched LLR versus 77% in matched OLR, p = 0.35, and 13% in matched LLR versus 17% in matched OLR, p = 0.97. TO completion was independently associated with a better 5-year OS (65.2% versus 42.5%, p = 0.007).

CONCLUSION

Major LLR after TACE/PVE should be considered as a valuable option in expert centers to increase the chance of TO, the latter being associated with a better 5-year OS.

Textbook Outcomes in Liver Surgery: a Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Assessment of the quality of care among patients undergoing hepatectomy may be inadequate using traditional "siloed" postoperative surgical outcome metrics. In turn, the combination of several quality metrics into a single composite Textbook Outcome in Liver Surgery (TOLS) may be more representative of "ideal" surgical care.

METHODS

Adhering to PRISMA guidelines, a search for primary articles on post-operative TOLS evaluation after hepatectomy was performed. Studies that did not present hepatectomy outcomes, pediatric or transplantation populations, duplicated series, and editorials were excluded. Studies were evaluated in aggregate for methodological variation, TOLS rates, factors associated with TOLS, hospital variation, and overall findings.

RESULTS

Among 207 identified publications, 32 observational cohort studies were selected for inclusion in the review. There was a total of 90,077 hepatic resections performed from 1993 to 2020 in the analytic cohort. While TOLS definitions varied widely, all studies used an "all-or-none" composite structure combining a median of 5 (range: 4-7) discrete parameters. Observed TOLS rates varied in the different reported populations from 11.2 to 77.0%. TOLS was associated with patient, hospital, and operative factors.

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review summarizes the contemporary international experience with TOLS to assess surgical performance following hepatobiliary surgery. TOLS is a single composite metric that may be more patient-centered, as well as better suited to quantify "optimal" care and compare performance among centers performing liver surgery.

Defining Global Benchmarks for Laparoscopic Liver Resections: An International Multicenter Study

OBJECTIVE

To establish global benchmark outcomes indicators after laparoscopic liver resections (L-LR).

BACKGROUND

There is limited published data to date on the best achievable outcomes after L-LR.

METHODS

This is a post hoc analysis of a multicenter database of 11,983 patients undergoing L-LR in 45 international centers in 4 continents between 2015 and 2020. Three specific procedures: left lateral sectionectomy (LLS), left hepatectomy (LH), and right hepatectomy (RH) were selected to represent the 3 difficulty levels of L-LR. Fifteen outcome indicators were selected to establish benchmark cutoffs.

RESULTS

There were 3519 L-LR (LLS, LH, RH) of which 1258 L-LR (40.6%) cases performed in 34 benchmark expert centers qualified as low-risk benchmark cases. These included 659 LLS (52.4%), 306 LH (24.3%), and 293 RH (23.3%). The benchmark outcomes established for operation time, open conversion rate, blood loss ≥500 mL, blood transfusion rate, postoperative morbidity, major morbidity, and 90-day mortality after LLS, LH, and RH were 209.5, 302, and 426 minutes; 2.1%, 13.4%, and 13.0%; 3.2%, 20%, and 47.1%; 0%, 7.1%, and 10.5%; 11.1%, 20%, and 50%; 0%, 7.1%, and 20%; and 0%, 0%, and 0%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

This study established the first global benchmark outcomes for L-LR in a large-scale international patient cohort. It provides an up-to-date reference regarding the "best achievable" results for L-LR for which centers adopting L-LR can use as a comparison to enable an objective assessment of performance gaps and learning curves.

Benchmarking: a novel measuring tool for outcome comparisons in surgery

INTRODUCTION

Benchmarking, a novel measuring tool for outcome comparisons, is a recent concept in surgery. The objectives of this review are to examine the concept, definition, and evolution of benchmarking and its application in surgery.

METHODS

The literature about benchmarking was reviewed through an ever-narrowing search strategy, commencing from the concept, definition, and evolution of benchmarking to the application of benchmarking and experiences of benchmarking in surgery. PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and Science Direct databases were searched until 20 September 2022, in the English language according to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines.

RESULTS

In the first phase of the literature search, the development of benchmarking was identified. The definitions of benchmarking evolved from a surveying term to a novel quality-improvement tool to assess the best achievable results in surgery. In the second phase, a total of 23 studies were identified about benchmarking in surgery, including esophagectomy, hepatic surgery, pancreatic surgery, rectum resection, and bariatric surgery. All studies were multicenter analyses from national, international, or global expert centers. Most studies (87.0%) adopted the definition that benchmark was the 75th percentile of the median values of centers. Performance metrics to define benchmarks were clinically relevant intraoperative and postoperative outcome indicators.

CONCLUSION

Benchmarking in surgery is a novel quality-improvement tool to define and measure the best achievable results, establishing a meaningful reference to evaluate surgical performance.

Textbook outcome in the surgical treatment of liver hydatid cyst

BACKGROUND

Textbook outcome is a composite measure used in surgery to define the ideal postoperative period and to assess the quality of care. The aim of this study was to analyze the incidence of textbook outcome and the factors independently associated with its achievement following surgical treatment of liver hydatid cysts.

METHODS

Retrospective cohort study of patients operated on for liver hydatid cysts between January 2006 and December 2021. Textbook outcome was achieved when all the following criteria were fulfilled: no mortality within 90 days, no major complications within 90 days, no hospital readmission within 90 days, and no prolonged hospital stay. Univariable and multivariable analyses were performed to identify factors associated with textbook outcome.

RESULTS

During the study period, 296 patients underwent surgery. Textbook outcome was recorded in 65.9% (195/296). Female gender (odds ratio 2.02; P = .010), noncomplicated cyst (odds ratio 3.97, P < .001), and radical surgery (odds ratio 2.26, P = .003) were the variables associated with a higher probability of achieving textbook outcome.

CONCLUSION

Textbook outcome may be a useful measure to assess the variations in surgical management between different centers, and to improve quality of care after liver hydatid cysts resection.

Textbook outcomes of hepatocellular carcinoma patients with sarcopenia: A multicenter analysis

BACKGROUND

The impact of sarcopenia on textbook outcome (TO) after hepatectomy in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients remains unclear. This study aimed to investigate the association between sarcopenia and TO, to clarify its long and short-term prognostic value, and to develop a nomogram model based on sarcopenia and TO for survival prediction.

METHODS

Patients who underwent HCC resection between January 2012 and March 2017 in three large hospitals in Fujian were retrospectively recruited and divided into sarcopenia and non-sarcopenia groups based on skeletal muscle index (SMI) values. TO was defined as no 30-day morality, no 30-day readmission, negative margins, no prolonged hospital stay, and no major complications. Multivariate regression was used to screen for clinical factors associated with TO. Nomograms of overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) after hepatectomy for HCC were developed.

RESULTS

A total of 1172 patients were included in the study. The TO rates were 28.74% (121/421 patients) in the sarcopenia group and 43.4% (326/751 patients) in the non-sarcopenia group. The results showed that sarcopenia was an independent predictor of TO (p < 0.001), TO was an independent predictor of perioperative treatment-related sarcopenia (PTRS)(p = 0.002), and TO was an independent predictor of OS and RFS (p < 0.001). Nomogram models based on sarcopenia and TO were generated and accurately predicted OS and RFS at 1, 3, and 5 years.

CONCLUSION

Both sarcopenia and TO are independent predictors of OS and RFS after HCC resection. Sarcopenia was an independent predictor of TO. Sarcopenia influenced long-term survival by affecting short-term postoperative outcomes.

Robotic versus laparoscopic major hepatectomy for hepatocellular carcinoma: short-term outcomes from a single institution

BACKGROUND

Currently, an increasing number of robotic major hepatectomies for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) are being performed. Despite the advantages of robotic surgery over laparoscopic procedures, studies comparing robotic with laparoscopic major hepatectomy in terms of short-term results remain scarce. This study was performed to compare robotic major hepatectomy and laparoscopic major hepatectomy in terms of their intraoperative and postoperative results.

METHODS

Data regarding demographics and intraoperative and postoperative results of 131 patients undergoing robotic or laparoscopic major hepatectomy between January 2017 and March 2022 were retrieved from their medical records and compared between the two types of surgery.

RESULTS

Between January 2017 and March 2022, 44 robotic major hepatectomies and 87 laparoscopic major hepatectomies were performed at the Department of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Shenzhen People's Hospital. Patients undergoing robotic major hepatectomy were not significantly different from those undergoing laparoscopic major hepatectomy in terms of age (P = 0.397), sex (P = 0.624), body mass index (BMI) (P = 0.118), alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) (P = 0.09), tumor size (P = 0.176), cirrhosis (P = 0.384), fatty liver (P = 0.162), preoperative antiviral treatment (P = 0.934), hepatitis B virus (HBV) DNA (P = 0.646) and operation type (P = 0.054). Robotic major hepatectomy was associated with a longer operation time (median: 255.5 versus 206.8 min; P < 0.001) and less estimated blood loss (median: 118.9 versus 197.0 ml; P = 0.002) than laparoscopic major hepatectomy. However, robotic major hepatectomy was not significantly different from laparoscopic major hepatectomy regarding length of postoperative hospital stay (P = 0.849), open conversion (P = 0.077), ICU stay (P = 0.866), postoperative massive abdominal bleeding (P = 1.00), portal vein thrombosis (P = 1.00), abdominal infection (P = 1.00), pulmonary infection (P = 1.00), pulmonary embolism (P = 1.00), cardiac complications (P = 1.00), liver failure (P = 1.00), kidney failure (P = 1.00), biliary leak (P = 1.00), positive resection margin (P = 1.00), 30-day mortality (P = 1.00) and 90-day mortality (P = 1.00).

CONCLUSIONS

Robotic major hepatectomy was as effective as laparoscopic surgery in terms of intraoperative and postoperative results but took longer and could more efficiently control intraoperative blood loss.

Textbook outcomes and benchmarks of minimally invasive left lateral sectionectomy across North America

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive approach represents the gold standard for the resection of the left lateral section of the liver. Recently, the American Minimally Invasive Liver Resection (AMILES) registry has become available to track outcomes of laparoscopic and robotic liver resection in the Americas. The aim of the present study is to determine the benchmark performance of MILLS throughout the AMILES database.

METHODS

The AMILES registry was interrogated for cases of minimally invasive left lateral sectionectomies (MILLS). Centers with best practices according to the achievement of textbook outcomes (TOs) were identified and were used to define benchmark performances.

RESULTS

Seven institutions from US and Canada entered 1665 minimally invasive liver resections, encompassing 203 MILLS. Overall, 49% of cases of MILLS satisfied contemporarily all textbook outcomes. While all centers obtained TOs with different rates of success, the outcomes of the top-ranking centers were used for benchmarking. Benchmark performance metrics of MILLS across North America are: conversion rate ≤ 3.7%, blood loss ≤ 200 ml, OR time ≤ 199 min, transfusion rate ≤ 4.5%, complication rate ≤ 7.9%, LOS ≤ 4 days.

CONCLUSION

Benchmark performances of MILLS have been defined on a large multi-institutional database in North America. As more institutions join the collaboration and more prospective cases accrue, benchmark for additional procedures and approaches will be defined.

Textbook outcome in hepato-pancreato-biliary surgery: systematic review

BACKGROUND

Textbook outcome (TO) is a multidimensional measure reflecting the ideal outcome after surgery. As a benchmarking tool, it provides an objective overview of quality of care. Uniform definitions of TO in hepato-pancreato-biliary (HPB) surgery are missing. This study aimed to provide a definition of TO in HPB surgery and identify obstacles and predictors for achieving it.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was conducted using PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Database according to PRISMA guidelines. Studies published between 1993 and 2021 were retrieved. After selection, two independent reviewers extracted descriptive statistics and derived summary estimates of the occurrence of TO criteria and obstacles for achieving TO using co-occurrence maps.

RESULTS

Overall, 30 studies were included. TO rates ranged between 16-69 per cent. Commonly chosen co-occurring criteria to define TO included 'no prolonged length of stay (LOS)', 'no complications', 'no readmission', and 'no deaths'. Major obstacles for achieving TO in HPB surgery were prolonged LOS, complications, and readmission. On multivariable analysis, TO predicted better overall and disease-free survival in patients with cancer. Achievement of TO was more likely in dedicated centres and associated with procedural and structural indicators, including high case-mix index and surgical volume.

CONCLUSION

TO is a useful quality measure to benchmark surgical outcome. Future definitions of TO in HPB surgery should include 'no prolonged LOS', 'no complications', 'no readmission', and 'no deaths'.

Assessment of Factors Associated with Morbidity and Textbook Outcomes of Laparoscopic Liver Resection in Obese Patients: A French Nationwide Study

BACKGROUND

Liver surgeons need to know the expected outcomes of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) in obese patients.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of the present study is to assess morbidity, mortality and textbook outcomes (TO) after LLR in obese patients.

METHODS

This is a French multicenter study of patients undergoing LLR between 1996 and 2018. Obesity was defined by a BMI at or above 30 kg/m 2 . Short-term outcomes and TO were compared between obese (ob) and nonobese (non-ob) patients. Factors associated with severe morbidity and TO were investigated.

RESULTS

Of 3,154 patients included, 616 (19.5%) were obese. Ob-group patients had significantly higher American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score and higher incidence of metabolic syndrome and chronic liver disease and were less likely to undergo major hepatectomy. Mortality rates were similar between ob and non-ob groups (0.8 vs 1.1%; p = 0.66). Overall morbidity and hospital stay were significantly increased in the ob group compared with the non-ob group (39.4 vs 34.7%, p = 0.03; and 9.5 vs 8.6 days, p = 0.02), whereas severe 90-day morbidity (at or above Clavien-Dindo grade III) was similar between groups (8% in both groups; p = 0.90). TO rate was significantly lower for the ob group than the non-ob group (58.3 vs 63.7%; p = 0.01). In multivariate analysis, obesity did not emerge as a risk factor for severe 90-day morbidity but was associated with a lower TO rate after LLR (odds ratio = 0.8, 95% CI 0.7-1.0; p = 0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

LLR in obese patients is safe and effective with acceptable mortality and morbidity. Obesity had no impact on severe morbidity but was a factor for failing to achieve TO after LLR.

Assessment of Textbook Oncologic Outcomes Following Modified Radical Mastectomy for Breast Cancer

INTRODUCTION

Textbook oncologic outcome (TOO) is a composite outcome measure attained when all desired short-term quality metrics are met following an oncologic operation. The objective of this study was to determine the incidence of TOO and its impact on the overall survival (OS) among patients with invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC) following modified radical mastectomy (MRM).

METHODS

The 2004-2017 National Cancer Database was queried for patients with non-metastatic IDC who underwent MRM. TOO was defined as having attained five metrics: resection with negative microscopic margins, American Joint Committee on Cancer compliant lymph node evaluation (n ≥ 10), no prolonged length of stay (50^th percentile by year), no 30-d readmission, and no 30-d mortality. OS was defined as the time in months between the date of diagnosis and the date of death or last contact.

RESULTS

A total of 75,063 patients were identified, of which 40.8% achieved TOO. The TOO patients had a lower median age and were more likely to be White, privately insured, and without comorbidities. In terms of facility characteristics, patients with TOO were more likely to be seen in comprehensive community cancer programs with a high case-volume per year. The TOO group had a statistically significant higher median OS compared to the non-TOO group (165.6 versus 142.2 mo; P < 0.001). On multivariate analysis TOO was independently associated with a reduced risk of death (HR = 0.82; P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

TOO is achieved in approximately 41% of patients undergoing MRM for IDC. Achieving TOO is associated with improved median OS and reduced risk of death. TOO therefore merits further attention in efforts to improve surgical outcomes.

Association between achieving textbook outcomes and better survival after laparoscopic liver resection in the anterolateral segments in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma

BACKGROUND

The quality of surgical procedures are assessed by textbook outcomes (TO). LLR is considered a standard treatment for HCC in the anterolateral segments of the liver. The main objective of this study was to evaluate the factors affecting achievement of TO for laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) and its impact on survival.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study of patients who underwent LLR for lesions located in the anterolateral segments (n=309). Patients were divided into TO and non-TO group.

RESULTS

A TO was achieved in 55.0% of patients (n=170). In multivariable analysis, Model for End-stage Liver Disease (MELD) score >10 (odds ratio[OR] 3.076; 95% confidence interval[CI] 1.134-8.342), absence of diabetes mellitus (OR 2.325; 95% CI 1.227-4.407) and thrombocytopenia (OR 2.115; 95% CI 1.134-8.342) were independently associated with not achieving TO. The 5-year overall (82.9% vs. 72.8%, P=0.017) and recurrence-free (48.8% vs. 35.4%; P=0.036) survival rates were significantly greater in the TO group than in the non-TO group.

CONCLUSION

The MELD score, thrombocytopenia, and hypoalbuminemia were independent risk factors influencing the achievement of TO. TO influences the short- and long-term outcomes after LLR for HCC.

Variations in risk-adjusted outcomes following 4318 laparoscopic liver resections

Background/Purpose

Quality measures in surgery are important to establish appropriate levels of care and to develop improvement strategies. The purpose of this study was to provide risk‐adjusted outcome measures after laparoscopic liver resection (LLR).

Methods

Data from a prospective, multicenter database involving 4318 patients submitted to LLRs in 41 hospitals from an intention‐to‐treat approach (2014–2020) were used to analyze heterogeneity (I²) among centers and to develop a risk‐adjustment model on outcome measures through multivariable mixed‐effect models to account for confounding due to case‐mix.

Results

Involved hospitals operated on very different patients: the largest heterogeneity was observed for operating in the presence of previous abdominal surgery (I²:79.1%), in cirrhotic patients (I²:89.3%) suffering from hepatocellular carcinoma (I²:88.6%) or requiring associated intestinal resections (I²:82.8%) and in regard to technical complexity (I² for the most complex LLRs: 84.1%). These aspects determined substantial or large heterogeneity in overall morbidity (I²:84.9%), in prolonged in‐hospital stay (I²:86.9%) and in conversion rate (I²:73.4%). Major complication had medium heterogeneity (I²:46.5%). The heterogeneity of mortality was null. Risk‐adjustment accounted for all of this variability and the final risk‐standardized conversion rate was 8.9%, overall morbidity was 22.1%, major morbidity was 5.1% and prolonged in‐hospital stay was 26.0%. There were no outliers among the 41 participating centers. An online tool was provided.

Conclusions

A benchmark for LLRs including all eligible patients was provided, suggesting that surgeons can act accordingly in the interest of the patient, modifying their approach in relation to different indications and different experience, but finally providing the same quality of care.

Textbook outcome among patients undergoing enhanced recovery after liver transplantation stratified by risk. A single-center retrospective observational cohort study

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Liver transplantation (LT) is one of the most complex surgical procedures. Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) aims to reduce the risk of postoperative complications. When patients achieve all desirable outcomes after a procedure, they are considered to have experienced a textbook outcome (TO).

METHODS

Two cohorts of patients undergoing low (n = 101) or medium risk (n = 15) LT were identified. The remaining patients (n = 65) were grouped separately. The ERAS protocol included pre-, intra-, and post-operative steps. TO was defined as the absence of complications, prolonged length of hospital stays, readmission and mortality during the first 90 days.

RESULTS

One third of patients who underwent ERAS after LT experienced a TO. On multivariable analysis, age (OR, 1.05 [95% CI, 1.01-1.09]; P = .02), and having hepatocellular carcinoma (OR, 2.83 [95% CI, 1.37-6.03]; P = .005) were individually associated with a greater probability of achieving a TO. Belonging to the cohorts of medium risk or outside the selection criteria was associated with a lower probability of achieving a TO (OR, 0.46 [96% CI, 0.22-0.93]; P = .03). Patients less likely to experience TO required more hospital resources. Patients who achieved TO were more likely to remain free of chronic kidney disease (achieved TO, 83.8% [82.7-85.6]; failed TO, 67.9% [66.9-70.2]; P < .05). Tacrolimus dose and trough levels were similar.

CONCLUSIONS

A novel finding of our study is that short and medium-term kidney function is better preserved in patients who experience a TO. Better kidney function of patients who achieve TO is not due to lower tacrolimus dosage.

Achievement of textbook outcomes and comparisons with benchmark values after laparoscopic left lateral sectionectomy

Laparoscopic left lateral sectionectomy (LLLS) is considered a standard approach for patients. Textbook outcomes (TOs) with benchmark values have been developed to help centers assess their outcomes of LLLS. The aim of our study was to identify factors associated with achieving TOs after LLLS. This is a retrospective cohort study including 195 patients undergoing LLLS between January 2004 and December 2018. Our outcomes were compared to benchmark values and graded as similar, better, or worse. A TO was achieved in 106 patients (54.4%). The main determinant for achieving a TO was prolonged hospital stay. Year of surgery [P = 0.002; odds ratio (OR) 3.913, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.666-9.188], American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score (P = 0.015; OR 0.104, 95% CI 0.017-0.650), body mass index (BMI) score (P = 0.075; OR 1.135, 95% CI 0.988-1.304), inflow clamping > 40 min (P = 0.037; OR 0.090, 95% CI 0.009-0.867) and operation time (P = 0.002; OR 0.991, 95% CI 0.985-0.997) were the factors associated with achieving a TO. Our outcomes were similar to the benchmark values for all criteria, except for the transfusion rate (our study vs benchmark values; 6.2% vs 3.8%), which was worse in our patients. We achieved better outcomes with a lower conversion rate (4.6% vs 7.2%), fewer patients requiring massive transfusion (4.1% vs 8.3%), lower rate of prolonged inflow clamping (3.9% vs 6.3%), lower overall complication rate (11.9% vs 19.8%), lower reoperation rate (0% vs 3.4%), and fewer patients with a positive margin (1.5% vs 10.8%). Year of surgery, ASA score, inflow clamping > 40 min and operation time were independently associated with failure to achieve a TO. TOs are useful tools to measure the surgical outcomes and compare surgical performance with benchmark values. TOs also offer a new method to retrospectively compare outcomes.

Factors Related to Textbook Outcome in Laparoscopic Liver Resections: a Single Western Centre Analysis

INTRODUCTION

The selection of the most informative quality of care indicator for laparoscopic liver surgery (LLS) is still debated; among those proposed, textbook outcome (TO) seems to provide a compositive measure of the outcomes of surgery. The aim of this study was to investigate the factors related with the TO in a cohort of patients who underwent LLS.

METHODS

Patients who underwent LLS from 2014 to 2021 were included. TO for LLS (TOLLS) was defined as: R0 resection, absence of intraoperative incidents, severe complications, reintervention, 30-day readmission and in-hospital mortality. When also considering no prolonged length of hospital stay (LOS), the outcome was called TOLLS+.

RESULTS

Four hundred twenty-one patients were included; TOLLS was achieved in 80.5%, TOLLS+ in 60.8% cases. R0 resection was obtained in 90.2% cases, intraoperative incidents occurred in 7.8%, severe complications in 5.0%, reintervention in 0.7%, readmission in 1.4% and in-hospital mortality in 0.2%. 32.5% of patients showed prolonged LOS. After univariate and multivariate analysis, factors influencing TOLLS were age (OR 0.967; p=0.003), concomitant surgery (OR 0.380; p=0.003), operative time (OR 0.996; p=0.008) and blood loss (OR 0.241; p<0.001); factors influencing TOLLS+ were ASA-score (OR 0.533; p=0.008), tumour histology (OR 0.421; p=0.021), concomitant surgery (OR 0.293; p<0.001), operative time (OR 0.997; p=0.016) and blood loss (OR 0.361; p=0.003).

CONCLUSIONS

TOLLS can be achieved in most patients undergoing LLR, and it seems to be influenced mostly by surgery-related factors; conversely, TOLLS+ is achieved less frequently and seems to be influenced also by patient- and tumour-related factors.

Is Textbook Oncologic Outcome a Valid Hospital-Quality Metric after High-Risk Surgical Oncology Procedures?

BACKGROUND

"Textbook oncologic outcome" (TOO) is a composite quality measure representing the "ideal" outcome for patients undergoing cancer surgery. This study sought to assess the validity of TOO as a metric to evaluate hospital quality.

METHODS

Patients who underwent curative-intent resection of gastric, pancreatic, colon, rectal, lung, esophageal, bladder, or ovarian cancer were identified in the National Cancer Database (2006-2017). Cancer site-specific TOO was defined as adequate lymph node yield, R0 resection, non-length-of-stay outlier, no hospital readmission, and receipt of guideline-concordant chemotherapy and/or radiation. Mixed-effects analyses estimated the adjusted TOO rate for each hospital stratified by cancer site. The association between hospital adjusted TOO rates and 5-year overall survival was assessed using mixed-effects Cox proportional hazards analyses.

RESULTS

Among 852,988 cancer resections, the TOO rate varied across cancer sites as follows: stomach (31.8%), pancreas (25%), colon (66.9%), rectum (33.6%), lung (35.1%), esophagus (31.2%), bladder (43%), and ovary (44.7%). After characterization of adjusted hospital TOO rates into quintiles, an incremental improvement in overall survival was observed, with higher adjusted TOO rates. Similarly, with the adjusted hospital TOO rate treated as a continuous variable, there was a significant 4% to 12% improvement in overall survival for every 10% increase in the adjusted hospital TOO rate for gastric (hazard ratio [HR], 0.88; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.85-0.91), pancreatic (HR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.88-0.93), colon (0.93; 95% CI, 0.91-0.94), rectal (HR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.87-0.93), lung (HR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.95-0.97), esophageal (HR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.90-0.95), bladder (HR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.91-0.97), and ovarian (HR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.94-0.98) cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

A direct association exists between adjusted hospital TOO rates and survival after high-risk cancer procedures. As a valid hospital metric, TOO can be used to compare the overall quality of cancer care across hospitals.

Laparoscopic versus open resection of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: nationwide analysis

BACKGROUND

The relevance of laparoscopic resection of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC) remains debated. The aim of this study was to compare laparoscopic (LLR) and open (OLR) liver resection for ICC, with specific focus on textbook outcome and lymph node dissection (LND).

METHODS

Patients undergoing LLR or OLR for ICC were included from two French, nationwide hepatopancreatobiliary surveys undertaken between 2000 and 2017. Patients with negative margins, and without transfusion, severe complications, prolonged hospital stay, readmission or death were considered to have a textbook outcome. Patients who achieved both a textbook outcome and LND were deemed to have an adjusted textbook outcome. OLR and LLR were compared after propensity score matching.

RESULTS

In total, 548 patients with ICC (127 LLR, 421 OLR) were included. Textbook-outcome and LND completion rates were 22.1 and 48.2 per cent respectively. LLR was independently associated with a decreased rate of LND (odds ratio 0.37, 95 per cent c.i. 0.20 to 0.69). After matching, 109 patients remained in each group. LLR was associated with a decreased rate of transfusion (7.3 versus 21.1 per cent; P = 0.001) and shorter hospital stay (median 7 versus 14 days; P = 0.001), but lower rate of LND (33.9 versus 73.4 per cent; P = 0.001). Patients who underwent LLR had lower rate of adjusted TO completion than patients who had OLR (6.5 versus 17.4 per cent; P = 0.012).

CONCLUSION

The laparoscopic approach did not substantially improve quality of care of patients with resectable ICC.

Validation of the IMM classification in laparoscopic repeat liver resections for colorectal liver metastases

BACKGROUND

To validate the Institut Mutualiste Montsouris classification as a difficulty scoring system applicable to laparoscopic repeat liver resections and identify risk-factors of unexpected difficulty.

METHODS

From a prospectively collected database between 2000 and 2019, patients undergoing laparoscopic repeat liver resections were classified according to the Institut Mutualiste Montsouris classification. Doubly robust estimators (weighted regressions) were used to assess the effect of factors on intra- and postoperative outcomes and allowed for strong adjustment on age, body mass index, American Society of Anesthesiologists, carcinoembryonic antigen, number, and size of lesions. Unexpected difficulty was defined as a composite indicator which included substantial blood loss and/or substantial operative time and/or conversion.

RESULTS

Of 205 laparoscopic repeat liver resections patients, 87, 25, and 93 procedures were classified as grade 1, 2, and 3 laparoscopic repeat liver resections, respectively. After doubly robust adjustment, the IMM classification was associated with blood loss (Cohen f² 0.12; P = 0.001), operative time (Cohen f² 0.07; P = .001), and length of stay (Cohen f² 0.13; P = .001), as well as with the risk of both minor and severe complications (odd ratio = 2.94; 95% confidence interval: 2.06-4.20) and the chances of achieving textbook outcome (relative risk = 0.57; 95% confidence interval: 0.41-0.81). Independently from the Institut Mutualiste Montsouris classification, a first major hepatectomy (relative risk = 1.15, 95% confidence interval: 1.03-1.29) as well as sinusoidal obstruction syndrome (relative risk = 1.24, 95% confidence interval: 1.09-1.41) were independent risk factors of unexpected difficulty. A first major resection was associated with decreased chances of textbook outcome (relative risk = 0.53; 95% confidence interval: 0.33-0.85).

CONCLUSION

The Institut Mutualiste Montsouris classification is a valuable difficulty scoring system for laparoscopic repeat liver resections procedures, while previous major resection and presence of sinusoidal obstruction syndrome are likely to jeopardize the outcomes.

Feasibility and outcomes of multiple simultaneous laparoscopic liver resections

INTRODUCTION

Surgeons often remain reluctant to consider laparoscopic approach in multiple liver tumors. This study assessed feasibility and short-term results of patients who had more than 3 simultaneous laparoscopic liver resections (LLR).

METHODS

All consecutive patients who underwent LLR for primary or secondary malignancies between 2009 and 2019 were analyzed. After exclusion of major LLR, patients were divided into three groups: less than three (Group A), between three and five (Group B), and more than five resections (Group C) in the same procedure. Intraoperative details, postoperative outcomes, and textbook outcome (TO) were compared in the 3 groups.

RESULTS

During study period, 463 patients underwent minor LLR. Among them, 412 (88.9%) had less than 3 resections, 38 (8.2%) between 3 and 5 resections, and 13 (2.8%) more than 5 resections. Despite a difficulty score according to IMM classification comparable in the 3 groups (with high difficulty grade 3 procedures of 16.5% vs. 15.7% vs. 23.1% in Group A, B, and C, respectively, p = 0.124), mean operative time was significantly longer in Group C (p = 0.039). Blood loss amount (p = 0.396) and conversion rate (p = 0.888) were similar in the 3 groups. Rate of R1 margins was not significantly different between groups (p = 0.078). Achievement of TO was not different between groups (p = 0.741). In multivariate analysis, non-achievement of TO was associated with difficulty according to IMM classification (OR = 2.29 (1.33-3.98)).

CONCLUSION

Since intra- and post-operative outcomes and quality of resection are comparable, multiple liver resections should not preclude the laparoscopic approach.

Influence of surgical approach and quality of resection on the probability of cure for early-stage HCC occurring in cirrhosis

BACKGROUND & AIMS

The quality of surgical care of patients with HCC is associated with improved long-term prognosis and may also be influenced by the type of surgical approach. The present study aimed at evaluating the role of the laparoscopic approach on quality of surgical care and long-term prognosis in optimal HCC surgical candidates.

METHODS

All consecutive patients undergoing open (OLR) or laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) for early-stage HCC in cirrhosis (METAVIR F4) at 5 French expert hepato-pancreatico-biliary centres between 2010 and 2018 were enrolled. Quality of surgical care was defined by textbook outcome (TO), a combination of 6 criteria representing ideal hospitalisation. Factors associated with TO were determined on multivariate analysis. Comparison between LLR and OLR was performed after propensity score matching (PSM). The primary endpoint was disease-free survival (DFS). Statistical cure was modelled using a non-mixture model.

RESULTS

Overall, 425 patients were included. Median follow-up was 42.0 months. LLR was performed in 267 (62.8%) patients. TO was achieved in 140 (32.9%) patients. LLR was independently associated with TO (odds ratio [OR] 2.81; 95% CI 1.29-6.12; p = 0.009). After PSM, LLR patients cumulated higher number of TO criteria than OLR patients (5 vs. 4; p = 0.012). The 1-, 3-, and 5-year DFS of LLR patients with and without TO were 82.3%, 64.4%, and 62.5%, and 76.9%, 51.4%, and 30.2%, respectively (p = 0.003). On multivariable Cox regression, TO was independently associated with improved DFS (hazard ratio 0.34; p = 0.001). The cure fraction of the whole population was 24.4%. Patients achieving TO had increased cure fraction than patients not achieving TO (32.6% vs. 18.1%).

CONCLUSIONS

Quality of surgical care improves the prognosis of patients with early-stage HCC and is promoted by the laparoscopic approach.

LAY SUMMARY

The overall quality of surgical care, as measured by TO, plays a pivotal role in the prognosis and, in particular, on the probability of statistical cure of patients with resectable early-stage HCC occurring in cirrhosis. By influencing TO, laparoscopy has an indirect impact on the probability of cure and long-term management of these patients. This study strongly supports the promising curative role of mini-invasive treatments for early-stage HCC, such as low-difficulty LLR.