Is surgical treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma at high-volume centers worth the additional cost?

Association of preoperative cholangitis with outcomes and expenditures among patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to characterize the association of preoperative acute cholangitis (PAC) with surgical outcomes and healthcare costs.

METHODS

Patients who underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) between 2013 and 2021 were identified using 100% Medicare Standard Analytic Files. PAC was defined as the occurrence of at least 1 episode of acute cholangitis within the year preceding surgery. Multivariable regression analyses were used to compare postoperative outcomes and costs relative to PAC.

RESULTS

Among 23,455 Medicare beneficiaries who underwent PD, 2,217 patients (9.5%) had at least 1 episode of PAC. Most patients (n = 14,729 [62.8%]) underwent PD for a malignant indication. On multivariable analyses, PAC was associated with elevated odds of surgical site infection (odds ratio [OR], 1.14; 95% CI, 1.01-1.29), sepsis (OR, 1.17; 95% CI, 1.01-1.37), extended length of stay (OR, 1.13; 95% CI, 1.01-1.26), and readmission within 90 days (OR, 1.14; 95% CI, 1.04-1.26). Patients with a history of PAC before PD had a reduced likelihood of achieving a postoperative textbook outcome (OR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.75-0.92) along with 87.8% and 18.4% higher associated preoperative and postoperative healthcare costs, respectively (all P < .001). Overall costs increased substantially among patients with more than 1 PAC episode ($59,893 [95% CI, $57,827-$61,959] for no episode vs $77,922 [95% CI, $73,854-$81,990] for 1 episode vs $101,205 [95% CI, $94,871-$107,539] for multiple episodes).

CONCLUSION

Approximately 1 in 10 patients undergoing PD experienced an antecedent PAC episode, which was associated with adverse surgical outcomes and greater healthcare expenditures.

Care fragmentation in hepatopancreatic surgery and postoperative outcomes

BACKGROUND

Practice fragmentation in surgery may be associated with poor quality of care. We sought to define the association between fragmented practice and outcomes in hepatopancreatic surgery relative to surgeon volume and sex.

METHODS

Medicare beneficiaries who underwent hepatopancreatic surgery between 2016 and 2021 were identified. Multivariable analysis was performed to determine provider sex-based differences in the rate of fragmented practice relative to the achievement of a textbook outcome and health care expenditures after adjusting for procedure-specific case volume.

RESULTS

Among 37,416 patients, almost one-half were female (n = 18,333, 49.0%) with the majority treated by male surgeons (n = 33,697, 90.8%). Female surgeons were more likely to have a greater rate of fragmented practice (females: n = 242, 84.9% vs males: n = 1,487, 78.4%, P = .003; odds ratio 2.66, 95% confidence interval 2.33-3.03, P < .001). Patients treated by high rate of fragmented practice surgeons had increased odds of postoperative complications (odds ratio 1.40, 95% confidence interval 1.28-1.54), extended length-of-stay (odds ratio 1.52, 95% confidence interval 1.38-1.68), 90-day-mortality (odds ratio 1.49, 95% confidence interval 1.28-1.72), and lower odds of achieving a textbook outcome (odds ratio 0.76, 95% confidence interval 0.71-0.83). This association persisted independent of surgeon-specific volume (textbook outcome, high vs low rate of fragmented practice: high-volume surgeon, odds ratio 0.53, 95% confidence interval 0.31-0.91, P = .021 vs. low-volume surgeon, odds ratio 0.76, 95% confidence interval 0.69-0.82, P < .001). Among patients treated by male surgeons, a high rate of fragmented practice was associated with reduced odds of achieving a textbook outcome (male surgeons: odds ratio 0.76, 95% confidence interval 0.70-0.82, P < .001; female surgeons: odds ratio 0.81, 95% confidence interval 0.63-1.05, P = .110). Treatment by surgeons with higher fragmented practice was associated with higher expenditures (index expenditure: percentage difference 9.87, 95% confidence interval, 7.42-12.36; P < .05).

CONCLUSION

A high rate of fragmented practice adversely affected postoperative outcomes and healthcare expenditures even among high-volume surgeons with the impact varying based on surgeon sex.

The impact of hospital volume on liver resection: A systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

This study aims to compare the outcomes of high-volume, medium-volume, and low-volume hospitals performing hepatic resections using a network meta-analysis.

METHODS

A literature search until June 2023 was conducted across major databases to identify studies comparing outcomes in high-volume, medium-volume, and low-volume hospitals for liver resection. Bayesian network meta-analysis was conducted, and surface under cumulative ranking area values, odds ratio, and mean difference with 95% credible intervals were reported for postoperative mortality, failure-to-rescue, morbidity, length of stay, and hospital costs.

RESULTS

Twenty studies comprising 248,707 patients undergoing liver resection were included. For the primary mortality outcome, overall and subgroup analyses were performed: group I: high-volume = 5 to 20 resections/year; group II: high-volume = 21 to 49 resections/year; group III: high-volume ≥50 resections/year. Results demonstrated a significant association between hospital volume and mortality (overall-high-volume versus medium-volume: odds ratio 0.66, 95% credible interval 0.49-0.87; high-volume versus low-volume: odds ratio 0.52, 95% credible interval 0.41-0.65; group I-high-volume versus low-volume: odds ratio 0.34, 95% credible interval 0.22-0.50; medium-volume versus low-volume: odds ratio 0.56, 95% credible interval 0.33-0.92; group II-high-volume versus low-volume: odds ratio 0.67, 95% credible interval 0.45-0.91), as well as length of stay (high-volume versus low-volume: mean difference -1.24, 95% credible interval -2.07 to -0.41), favoring high-volume hospitals. No significant difference was observed in failure-to-rescue, morbidity, or hospital costs across the 3 groups.

CONCLUSION

This study supports a positive relationship between hospital volume and surgical outcomes in liver resection. Patients from high-volume hospitals experience superior outcomes in terms of lower postoperative mortality and shorter lengths of stay than medium-volume and low-volume hospitals.