Defining Benchmarks for Major Liver Surgery: A multicenter Analysis of 5202 Living Liver Donors

Defining Surgical Difficulty During Open Right Lobe Donor Hepatectomy and its Prediction Using Preoperative Donor Computed Tomography Morphometry

Background

There is no accepted way to define difficult donor hepatectomy (DiffDH) during open right live donor hepatectomy (ORLDH). There are also no studies exploring association between DiffDH and early donor outcomes or reliable pre-operative predictors of DiffDH.

Methods

Consecutive ORLDH performed over 18 months at a single center were included. Intraoperative parameters were used to develop an objective definition of DiffDH. The impact of DiffDH on early postoperative outcomes and achievement of textbook outcome (TO) was evaluated. Donor morphometry data on axial and coronal sections of donor computed tomography (CT) at the level of portal bifurcation were collected. Donor and graft factors predictive of DiffDH were evaluated using univariate and multivariate logistic regression.

Results

One-hundred-eleven donors (male: 40.5%, age: 34 ± 9.5 years) underwent ORLDH during the study period. The difficulty score was constructed using five intraoperative parameters, i.e., operating time, transection time, estimated blood loss, need for intraoperative vasopressors, and need for Pringle maneuver. Donors were classified as DiffDH (score ≥ 2) or standard donor hepatectomy (StDH) (score <2). Twenty-nine donors (26%) were classified as DiffDH. DiffDH donors suffered greater all-cause morbidity (P = 0.004) but not major morbidity (Clavien-Dindo score >2; P = 0.651), more perioperative transfusion (P = 0.013), increased postoperative systemic inflammatory response syndrome (P = 0.034), delay in achieving full oral diet (P = 0.047), and a 70% reduced chance of achieving TO as compared to StDH (P = 0.007). On logistic regression analysis, increasing right lobe anteroposterior depth (RLdepth) was identified as an independent predictor of DiffDH (Odds ratio: 2.0 (95% confidence interval = 1.2, 3.3), P < 0.006). Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis identified an RLdepth of >14 cm as the best predictor of DiffDH (sensitivity:79%, specificity: 66%, area under curve = 0.803, P < 0.001).

Conclusion

We report a novel definition of DiffDH and show that it is associated with worse postoperative outcomes, including a lesser chance of achieving TO. We also report that DiffDH can be predicted from readily available donor CT parameters.

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.

Indications and results of right-lobe living donor liver transplantation

The shortage of deceased liver donor organs over the years has always posed the need to expand the donor pool. A viable alternative to deceased donors is that of the living donor. Indeed, the living donor in liver transplantation, initially in pediatric transplantation, but for several years now also in adult transplantation, is a more than viable alternative to deceased liver donation. In fact, right liver lobe donation has proven to be a surgical procedure with low impact on the donor's life in terms of morbidity and mortality, with excellent results in recipients of such organs. In recent years, an increasing number of studies have been published that show excellent results in right-lobe living donor liver transplantation, encouraging this practice not only in countries that have historically had a shortage of deceased donor organs, such as Asian countries, but making it a practice of increasing use in Western countries as well. In addition, thanks to improvements in surgical technique and the experience of high-volume centers, this surgery has also begun to be performed using minimally invasive surgical techniques, allowing us to envision ever better outcomes for both donor and recipient in the coming years.

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.

Benchmark Outcomes in Deceased Donor Kidney Transplantation: A Multicenter Analysis of 80 996 Transplants From 126 Centers

Background

We defined clinically relevant benchmark values in deceased donor kidney transplantation (KT), to assess the best achievable results in low-risk patient cohorts from experienced centers.

Methods

We identified the "ideal" cases from the United Network for Organ Sharing Standard Transplant Analysis and Research files from centers performing ≥50 KT per year between 2010 and 2018. Cases have been selected based on the kidney donor profile index values (<35%), a cold ischemia time (CIT) ≤18 h, a HLA mismatch ≤4, and excluding blood group (ABO) incompatible, dual and combined transplants. The outcomes of the benchmark cohort have been compared with a group of patients excluded from the benchmark cohort because but not meeting 1 or more of the abovementioned criteria.

Results

The 171 424 KT patients in the United Network for Organ Sharing Standard Transplant Analysis and Research files were screened and 8694 benchmark cases of a total of 80 996 KT (10.7%) from 126 centers meeting the selection criteria were identified. The benchmarks for 1-, 3-, and 5-y patient survival are ≥97%, ≥92.5%, and ≥86.7%, and ≥95.4%, ≥87.8%, and ≥79.6% for graft survival. Benchmark cutoff for hospital length of stay is ≤5 d, ≤23.6% for delayed graft function, and ≤7.5% and ≤9.1% for 6-mo and 1-y incidence of acute rejection. Overall 1-, 3-, and 5-y actuarial graft survivals were 96.6%, 91.1%, and 84.2% versus 93.5%, 85.4%, and 75.5% in the benchmark and comparison groups, respectively (P < 0.001). Overall 1-, 3-, and 5-y actuarial patient survivals were 98.1%, 94.8%, and 90.0% versus 96.6%, 91.1%, and 83.0% in the benchmark and comparison groups, respectively (P < 0.001).

Conclusions

For the first time, we quantified the best achievable postoperative results in an ideal scenario in deceased donor KT, aimed at improving the clinical practice guided by the comparison of center performances with the ideal outcomes defined.

Defining benchmark outcomes for mesial temporal lobe epilepsy surgery: A global multicenter analysis of 1119 cases

OBJECTIVE

Benchmarking has been proposed to reflect surgical quality and represents the highest standard reference values for desirable results. We sought to determine benchmark outcomes in patients after surgery for drug-resistant mesial temporal lobe epilepsy (MTLE).

METHODS

This retrospective multicenter study included patients who underwent MTLE surgery at 19 expert centers on five continents. Benchmarks were defined for 15 endpoints covering surgery and epilepsy outcome at discharge, 1 year after surgery, and the last available follow-up. Patients were risk-stratified by applying outcome-relevant comorbidities, and benchmarks were calculated for low-risk ("benchmark") cases. Respective measures were derived from the median value at each center, and the 75th percentile was considered the benchmark cutoff.

RESULTS

A total of 1119 patients with a mean age (range) of 36.7 (1-74) years and a male-to-female ratio of 1:1.1 were included. Most patients (59.2%) underwent anterior temporal lobe resection with amygdalohippocampectomy. The overall rate of complications or neurological deficits was 14.4%, with no in-hospital death. After risk stratification, 377 (33.7%) benchmark cases of 1119 patients were identified, representing 13.6%-72.9% of cases per center and leaving 742 patients in the high-risk cohort. Benchmark cutoffs for any complication, clinically apparent stroke, and reoperation rate at discharge were ≤24.6%, ≤.5%, and ≤3.9%, respectively. A favorable seizure outcome (defined as International League Against Epilepsy class I and II) was reached in 83.6% at 1 year and 79.0% at the last follow-up in benchmark cases, leading to benchmark cutoffs of ≥75.2% (1-year follow-up) and ≥69.5% (mean follow-up of 39.0 months).

SIGNIFICANCE

This study presents internationally applicable benchmark outcomes for the efficacy and safety of MTLE surgery. It may allow for comparison between centers, patient registries, and novel surgical and interventional techniques.

Experts vs. machine - comparison of machine learning to expert-informed prediction of outcome after major liver surgery

BACKGROUND

Machine learning (ML) has been successfully implemented for classification tasks (e.g., cancer diagnosis). ML performance for more challenging predictions is largely unexplored. This study's objective was to compare machine learning vs. expert-informed predictions for surgical outcome in patients undergoing major liver surgery.

METHODS

Single tertiary center data on preoperative parameters and postoperative complications for elective hepatic surgery patients were included (2008-2021). Expert-informed prediction models were established on 14 parameters identified by two expert liver surgeons to impact on postoperative outcome. ML models used all available preoperative patient variables (n = 62). Model performance was compared for predicting 3-month postoperative overall morbidity. Temporal validation and additional analysis in major liver resection patients were conducted.

RESULTS

889 patients included. Expert-informed models showed low average bias (2-5 CCI points) with high over/underprediction. ML models performed similarly: average prediction 5-10 points higher than observed CCI values with high variability (95% CI -30 to 50). No performance improvement for major liver surgery patients.

CONCLUSION

No clinical relevance in the application of ML for predicting postoperative overall morbidity was found. Despite being a novel hype, ML has the potential for application in clinical practice. However, at this stage it does not replace established approaches of prediction modelling.

Complex Hepatectomy Under Total Vascular Exclusion of the Liver Preserving the Caval Flow with Portal Hypothermic Perfusion and Temporary Portacaval Shunt: A Proof of Concept

BACKGROUND

Hypothermic liver perfusion decreases ischemia/reperfusion injury during hepatectomy under standard total vascular exclusion (TVE) of the liver. This surgery needs venovenous bypass and is hampered by high morbi-mortality. TVE preserving the inferior vena cava (IVC) flow is hemodynamically well tolerated but remains limited in duration when performed under liver normothermia. The objective of this study was to report the results of TVE preserving the caval flow, modified to allow hypothermic liver perfusion and obviate splanchnic congestion.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The technique, indicated for tumors abutting large tributaries of the hepatic veins but sparing their roots in IVC and the latter, was applied when TVE was anticipated to last for ≥ 60 min. It combines continuous TVE preserving the IVC flow with hypothermic liver perfusion and temporary portacaval shunt (PCS). Results are given as median (range).

RESULTS

Vascular control was achieved in 13 patients with excellent hemodynamical tolerance. PCS was direct or via an interposed synthetic graft (five and eight cases, respectively). Liver temperature dropped to 16.5 (6-24) °C under perfusion of 2 (2-4) L of cold perfusate. TVE lasted 67 (54-125) min and 4.5 (0-8) blood units were transfused. Resection was major in nine cases and was complete in all cases. Five complications occurred in four patients, and the 90-day mortality rate was zero.

CONCLUSIONS

This technique maintains stable hemodynamics and combines the advantages of in situ or ex situ standard TVE with hypothermic liver perfusion, without their inherent prolongation of ischemia time and need for venovenous bypass.

Early experience with pure laparoscopic donor hepatectomy: comparison with open donor hepatectomy and non-donor laparoscopic hepatectomy

BACKGROUND

Pure laparoscopic donor hepatectomy (L-DH) has seen a rise in uptake in recent years following the popularization of minimally invasive modality for major hepatobiliary surgery. Our study aimed to determine the safety and compare the perioperative outcomes of L-DH with open donor hepatectomy (O-DH) and laparoscopic non donor hepatectomy (L-NDH) based on our single institution experience.

METHODS

Eighty of 113 laparoscopic hemi-hepatectomies performed between 2015 and 2022 met study inclusion criteria. Of these, 11 were L-DH. PSM in a 1:2 ratio of L-DH versus L-NDH and 1:1 ratio of L-DH versus O-DH were performed, identifying patients with similar baseline clinicopathological characteristics.

RESULTS

After 2:1 matching, the L-DH cohort were significantly younger (P < 0.001) and had lower ASA scores (P < 0.001) than the L-NDH cohort. L-DH was associated with a longer median operating time (P < 0.001) and shorter median postoperative stay (P < 0.001) than L-NDH. After 1:1 matching, there were no significant differences in baseline demographic between the L-DH and O-DH cohorts. L-DH was associated with lower median blood loss (P = 0.040) and shorter length of stay compared to O-DH (P = 0.004). There were no significant differences in recipient outcomes for both cohorts.

CONCLUSION

L-DH can be adopted safely by surgeons experienced in L-NDH and ODH. It is associated with decreased blood loss and shorter length of stay compared to O-DH.

Identifying critical quality metrics in Mohs Surgery: A national expert consensus process

BACKGROUND

Amid a movement toward value-based healthcare, increasing emphasis has been placed on outcomes and cost of medical services. To define and demonstrate the quality of services provided by Mohs surgeons, it is important to identify and understand the key aspects of Mohs micrographic surgery (MMS) that contribute to excellence in patient care.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study is to develop and identify a comprehensive list of metrics in an initial effort to define excellence in MMS.

METHODS

Mohs surgeons participated in a modified Delphi process to reach a consensus on a list of metrics. Patients were administered surveys to gather patient perspectives.

RESULTS

Twenty-four of the original 66 metrics met final inclusion criteria. Broad support for the initiative was obtained through physician feedback.

LIMITATIONS

Limitations of this study include attrition bias across survey rounds and participation at the consensus meeting. Furthermore, the list of metrics is based on expert consensus instead of quality evidence-based outcomes.

CONCLUSION

With the goal of identifying metrics that demonstrate excellence in performance of MMS, this initial effort has shown that Mohs surgeons and patients have unique perspectives and can be engaged in a data-driven approach to help define excellence in the field of MMS.

Living Donor Liver Transplantation: Left Lobe or Right Lobe

Living Donor Liver Transplantation (LDLT) has seen great advancements since its inception in 1988. Herein, the nuances of LDLT are discussed spanning from donor evaluation to the recipient operation. Special attention is given to donor anatomy and graft optimization techniques in the recipient.

Trends in the characteristics and perioperative outcomes of patients undergoing laparoscopic and open resections for benign liver lesions: An international multicenter retrospective cohort study of 845 patients

BACKGROUND

Solid benign liver lesions (BLL) are increasingly discovered, but clear indications for surgical treatment are often lacking. Concomitantly, laparoscopic liver surgery is increasingly performed. The aim of this study was to assess if the availability of laparoscopic surgery has had an impact on the characteristics and perioperative outcomes of patients with BLL.

METHODS

This is a retrospective international multicenter cohort study, including patients undergoing a laparoscopic or open liver resection for BLL from 19 centers in eight countries. Patients were divided according to the time period in which they underwent surgery (2008-2013, 2014-2016, and 2017-2019). Unadjusted and risk-adjusted (using logistic regression) time-trend analyses were performed. The primary outcome was textbook outcome (TOLS), defined as the absence of intraoperative incidents ≥ grade 2, bile leak ≥ grade B, severe complications, readmission and 90-day or in-hospital mortality, with the absence of a prolonged length of stay added to define TOLS+.

RESULTS

In the complete dataset comprised of patients that underwent liver surgery for all indications, the proportion of patients undergoing liver surgery for benign disease remained stable (12.6% in the first time period, 11.9% in the second time period and 12.1% in the last time period, p = 0.454). Overall, 845 patients undergoing a liver resection for BLL in the first (n = 374), second (n = 258) or third time period (n = 213) were included. The rates of ASA-scores≥3 (9.9%-16%,p < 0.001), laparoscopic surgery (57.8%-77%,p < 0.001), and Pringle maneuver use (33.2%-47.2%,p = 0.001) increased, whereas the length of stay decreased (5 to 4 days,p < 0.001). There were no significant changes in the TOLS rate (86.6%-81.3%,p = 0.151), while the TOLS + rate increased from 41.7% to 58.7% (p < 0.001). The latter result was confirmed in the risk-adjusted analyses (aOR 1.849,p = 0.004).

CONCLUSION

The surgical treatment of BLL has evolved with an increased implementation of the laparoscopic approach and a decreased length of stay. This evolution was paralleled by stable TOLS rates above 80% and an increase in the TOLS + rate.

An international survey of venous thromboembolic events and current practices of peri-operative VTE prophylaxis after living donor hepatectomy

BACKGROUND

Venous thromboembolic complications are an uncommon but significant cause of morbidity & mortality after live donor hepatectomy . The precise incidence of these events and the current practices of centers performing living donor liver transplantation worldwide are unknown.

METHODS

An online survey was shared amongst living donor liver transplantation centers containing questions regarding center activity, center protocols for donor screening, peri-operative thromboembolic prophylaxis and an audit of -perioperative venous thromboembolic events after live donor hepatectomy in the previous five years (2016-2020).

RESULTS

Fifty-one centers from twenty countries completed the survey. These centers had cumulatively performed 11500 living donor liver transplants between 2016-2020. All centers included pre-operative l assessment for thromboembolic risk amongst potential liver donors in their protocols. Testing for inherited prothrombotic conditions was performed by 58% of centers. Dual-mode prophylaxis was the most common practice (65%), while eight and four centers used single mode or no routine prophylaxis respectively. Twenty (39%) and 15 (29%) centers reported atleast one perioperative deep venous thrmobosis or pulmonary embolism event respectively. There was one donor mortality directly related to post-operative pulmonary embolism. Overall incidence of deep venous thrombosis and pulmonary embolism events was 3.65 and 1.74 per 1000 live donor hepatectomies respectively. Significant variations in center practices and incidence of thromboembolic events was identified in the survey primarily divided along world regions. 75% of participating centers agreed on the need for clear international guidelines.

CONCLUSION

Venous thromboembolic events after live donor hepatectomy are an uncommon but important cause of donor morbidity. There is significant variation in practice among centers. Evidence-based guidelines regarding risk assessment, and peri-operative prophylaxis are needed.

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.

Novel Benchmark Values for Open Major Anatomic Liver Resection in Non-cirrhotic Patients: A Multicentric Study of 44 International Expert Centers

OBJECTIVE

This study aims at establishing benchmark values for best achievable outcomes following open major anatomic hepatectomy for liver tumors of all dignities.

BACKGROUND

Outcomes after open major hepatectomies vary widely lacking reference values for comparisons among centers, indications, types of resections, and minimally invasive procedures.

METHODS

A standard benchmark methodology was used covering consecutive patients, who underwent open major anatomic hepatectomy from 44 high-volume liver centers from 5 continents over a 5-year period (2016-2020). Benchmark cases were low-risk non-cirrhotic patients without significant comorbidities treated in high-volume centers (≥30 major liver resections/year). Benchmark values were set at the 75th percentile of median values of all centers. Minimum follow-up period was 1 year in each patient.

RESULTS

Of 8044 patients, 2908 (36%) qualified as benchmark (low-risk) cases. Benchmark cutoffs for all indications include R0 resection ≥78%; liver failure (grade B/C) ≤10%; bile leak (grade B/C) ≤18%; complications ≥grade 3 and CCI ® ≤46% and ≤9 at 3 months, respectively. Benchmark values differed significantly between malignant and benign conditions so that reference values must be adjusted accordingly. Extended right hepatectomy (H1, 4-8 or H4-8) disclosed a higher cutoff for liver failure, while extended left (H1-5,8 or H2-5,8) were associated with higher cutoffs for bile leaks, but had superior oncologic outcomes, when compared to formal left hepatectomy (H1-4 or H2-4). The minimal follow-up for a conclusive outcome evaluation following open anatomic major resection must be 3 months.

CONCLUSION

These new benchmark cutoffs for open major hepatectomy provide a powerful tool to convincingly evaluate other approaches including parenchymal-sparing procedures, laparoscopic/robotic approaches, and alternative treatments, such as ablation therapy, irradiation, or novel chemotherapy regimens.

Novel Benchmark for Adult-to-Adult Living-donor Liver Transplantation: Integrating Eastern and Western Experiences

OBJECTIVE

To define benchmark values for adult-to-adult living-donor liver transplantation (LDLT).

BACKGROUND

LDLT utilizes living-donor hemiliver grafts to expand the donor pool and reduce waitlist mortality. Although references have been established for donor hepatectomy, no such information exists for recipients to enable conclusive quality and comparative assessments.

METHODS

Patients undergoing LDLT were analyzed in 15 high-volume centers (≥10 cases/year) from 3 continents over 5 years (2016-2020), with a minimum follow-up of 1 year. Benchmark criteria included a Model for End-stage Liver Disease ≤20, no portal vein thrombosis, no previous major abdominal surgery, no renal replacement therapy, no acute liver failure, and no intensive care unit admission. Benchmark cutoffs were derived from the 75th percentile of all centers' medians.

RESULTS

Of 3636 patients, 1864 (51%) qualified as benchmark cases. Benchmark cutoffs, including posttransplant dialysis (≤4%), primary nonfunction (≤0.9%), nonanastomotic strictures (≤0.2%), graft loss (≤7.7%), and redo-liver transplantation (LT) (≤3.6%), at 1-year were below the deceased donor LT benchmarks. Bile leak (≤12.4%), hepatic artery thrombosis (≤5.1%), and Comprehensive Complication Index (CCI ® ) (≤56) were above the deceased donor LT benchmarks, whereas mortality (≤9.1%) was comparable. The right hemiliver graft, compared with the left, was associated with a lower CCI ® score (34 vs 21, P < 0.001). Preservation of the middle hepatic vein with the right hemiliver graft had no impact neither on the recipient nor on the donor outcome. Asian centers outperformed other centers with CCI ® score (21 vs 47, P < 0.001), graft loss (3.0% vs 6.5%, P = 0.002), and redo-LT rates (1.0% vs 2.5%, P = 0.029). In contrast, non-benchmark low-volume centers displayed inferior outcomes, such as bile leak (15.2%), hepatic artery thrombosis (15.2%), or redo-LT (6.5%).

CONCLUSIONS

Benchmark LDLT offers a valuable alternative to reduce waitlist mortality. Exchange of expertise, public awareness, and centralization policy are, however, mandatory to achieve benchmark outcomes worldwide.

Quality and Outcome Assessment for Surgery

ABSTRACT

This forum summarizes the proceedings of the joint European Surgical Association (ESA)/American Surgical Association (ASA) symposium on Quality and Outcome Assessment for Surgery that took place in Bordeaux, France, as part of the celebrations of the 30th anniversary of the ESA. Three presentations focused on a) the main messages from the Outcome4Medicine Consensus Conference, which took place in Zurich, Switzerland, in June 2022, b) the patient perspective, and c) benchmarking were hold by ESA members and discussed by ASA members in a symposium attended by members of both associations.

The Goal of Intraoperative Blood Loss in Major Hepatobiliary Resection for Perihilar Cholangiocarcinoma: Saving Patients From a Heavy Complication Burden

OBJECTIVE

To determine the goal of intraoperative blood loss in hepatectomy for perihilar cholangiocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND

Although massive bleeding can negatively affect the postoperative course, the target value of intraoperative bleeding to reduce its adverse impact is unknown.

METHODS

Patients who underwent major hepatectomy for perihilar cholangiocarcinoma between 2010 and 2019 were included. Intraoperative blood loss was adjusted for body weight [adjusted blood loss (aBL)], and the overall postoperative complications were evaluated by the comprehensive complication index (CCI). The impact of aBL on CCI was assessed by the restricted cubic spline regression.

RESULTS

A total of 425 patients were included. The median aBL was 17.8 (interquartile range, 11.8-26.3) mL/kg, and the CCI was 40.6 (33.7-49.5). Sixty-three (14.8%) patients had an aBL<10 mL/kg, nearly half (45.4%) of the patients were in the range of 10 ≤aBL<20 mL/kg, and 37 (8.7%) patients had an aBL >40 mL/kg. The spline regression analysis showed a nonlinear incremental association between aBL and CCI; CCI remained flat with an aBL under 10 mL/kg; increased significantly with an aBL ranging from 10 to 20 mL/kg; grew gradually with an aBL over 20 mL/kg. These inflection points of ~10 and 20 mL/kg were almost consistent with the cutoff values identified by the recursive partitioning technique. After adjusting for other risk factors for the postoperative course, the spline regression identified a similar model.

CONCLUSIONS

aBL had a nonlinear aggravating effect on CCI after hepatectomy for perihilar cholangiocarcinoma. The primary goal of aBL should be <10 mL/kg to minimize CCI.

Benchmarks and Geographic Differences in Gallbladder Cancer Surgery: An International Multicenter Study

BACKGROUND

High-quality surgery plays a central role in the delivery of excellent oncologic care. Benchmark values indicate the best achievable results. We aimed to define benchmark values for gallbladder cancer (GBC) surgery across an international population.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This study included consecutive patients with GBC who underwent curative-intent surgery during 2000-2021 at 13 centers, across seven countries and four continents. Patients operated on at high-volume centers without the need for vascular and/or bile duct reconstruction and without significant comorbidities were chosen as the benchmark group.

RESULTS

Of 906 patients who underwent curative-intent GBC surgery during the study period, 245 (27%) were included in the benchmark group. These were predominantly women (n = 174, 71%) and had a median age of 64 years (interquartile range 57-70 years). In the benchmark group, 50 patients (20%) experienced complications within 90 days after surgery, with 20 patients (8%) developing major complications (Clavien-Dindo grade ≥ IIIa). Median length of postoperative hospital stay was 6 days (interquartile range 4-8 days). Benchmark values included ≥ 4 lymph nodes retrieved, estimated intraoperative blood loss ≤ 350 mL, perioperative blood transfusion rate ≤ 13%, operative time ≤ 332 min, length of hospital stay ≤ 8 days, R1 margin rate ≤ 7%, complication rate ≤ 22%, and rate of grade ≥ IIIa complications ≤ 11%.

CONCLUSIONS

Surgery for GBC remains associated with significant morbidity. The availability of benchmark values may facilitate comparisons in future analyses among GBC patients, GBC surgical approaches, and centers performing GBC surgery.

Fistula Risk Score for Auditing Pancreatoduodenectomy: The Auditing-FRS

OBJECTIVE

To develop a fistula risk score for auditing, to be able to compare postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) after pancreatoduodenectomy among hospitals.

BACKGROUND

For proper comparisons of outcomes in surgical audits, case-mix variation should be accounted for.

METHODS

This study included consecutive patients after pancreatoduodenectomy from the mandatory nationwide Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Audit. Derivation of the score was performed with the data from 2014 to 2018 and validation with 2019 to 2020 data. The primary endpoint of the study was POPF (grade B or C). Multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed for case-mix adjustment of known risk factors.

RESULTS

In the derivation cohort, 3271 patients were included, of whom 479 (14.6%) developed POPF. Male sex [odds ratio (OR)=1.34; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.09-1.66], higher body mass index (OR=1.07; 95% CI: 1.05-1.10), a final diagnosis other than pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma/pancreatitis (OR=2.41; 95% CI: 1.90-3.06), and a smaller duct diameter (OR=1.43/mm decrease; 95% CI: 1.32-1.55) were independently associated with POPF. Diabetes mellitus (OR=0.73; 95% CI: 0.55-0.98) was independently associated with a decreased risk of POPF. Model discrimination was good with a C -statistic of 0.73 in the derivation cohort and 0.75 in the validation cohort (n=913). Hospitals differed in particular in the proportion of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma/pancreatitis patients, ranging from 36.0% to 58.1%. The observed POPF risk per center ranged from 2.9% to 25.4%. The expected POPF rate based on the 5 risk factors ranged from 11.6% to 18.0% among hospitals.

CONCLUSIONS

The auditing fistula risk score was successful in case-mix adjustment and enables fair comparisons of POPF rates among hospitals.

Updates and Expert Opinions on Liver Transplantation for Gastrointestinal Malignancies

Transplant oncology is a relatively new field in which transplantation is used to treat patients who would otherwise be unresectable. New anticancer treatment paradigms using tumor and transplant immunology and cancer immunogenomics are emerging. In turn, liver transplantation (LT) has become a potential therapy for certain patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) with liver metastasis, hepatocellular (HCC), cholangiocarcinoma (CCA), and metastatic neuroendocrine tumor (NET) of the liver. Although there are established criteria for LT in HCC, evidence regarding LT as a treatment modality for certain gastrointestinal malignancies is still debated. The aim of this review is to highlight updates in the role of LT for certain malignancies, including HCC, metastatic CRC, hilar CCA, and neuroendocrine tumor (NET), as well as contextualize LT use and discuss controversies in transplant oncology.

Benchmarking outcomes for distal pancreatectomy: critical evaluation of four multicenter studies

BACKGROUND

Benchmarking is a validated tool for outcome assessment and international comparison of best achievable surgical outcomes. The methodology is increasingly applied in pancreatic surgery and the aim of the review was to critically compare available benchmark studies evaluating distal pancreatectomy (DP).

METHODS

A literature search of English articles reporting on benchmarking DP was conducted of the electronic databases MEDLINE and Web of Science (until April 2023). Studies on open (ODP), laparoscopic (LDP), and robotic DP (RDP) were included.

RESULTS

Four retrospective multicenter studies were included. Studies reported on outcomes of minimally invasive DP only (n = 2), ODP and LDP (n = 1), and RDP only (n = 1). Either the Achievable Benchmark of Care™ method or the 75th percentile from the median was selected to define benchmark cutoffs. Robust and reproducible benchmark values were provided by the four studies for intra- and postoperative short-term outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Benchmarking DP is a valuable tool for obtaining internationally accepted reference outcomes for open and minimally invasive DP approaches with only minor variances in four international cohorts. Benchmark cutoffs allow for outcome comparisons between institutions, surgeons, and to monitor the introduction of novel minimally invasive DP techniques.

Significance of predicted future liver remnant volume on liver failure risk after major hepatectomy: a case matched comparative study

Introduction

Future liver remnant volume (FLRV), a risk factor for liver failure (PHLF) after major hepatectomy (MH), is not routinely measured. This study aimed to evaluate the association between FLRV and PHLF.

Patients and methods

All patients undergoing MH (4 + segments) between 2011 and 2018 were identified from a prospectively maintained single-centre database. Perioperative data were collected for patients with PHLF, who were matched (1:2) with non-PHLF controls. FLRV and FLRV_% (i.e., % of total liver volume) were calculated retrospectively from preoperative CT scans using Synapse-3D software, and compared between the PHLF and matched control groups.

Results

Of 711 patients undergoing MH, PHLF occurred in 27 (3.8%), of whom 24 had preoperative CT scans available. These patients were matched to 48 non-PHLF controls, 98% of whom were classified as being at high risk of PHLF on preoperative risk scoring. FLRV_% was significantly lower in the PHLF group, compared to matched controls (median: 28.7 vs. 35.2%, p = 0.010), with FLRV% < 30% in 58% and 29% of patients, respectively. Assessment of the ability of FLRV_% to differentiate between PHLF and matched controls returned an area under the ROC curve of 0.69, and an optimal cut-off value of FLRV_% < 31.5%, which yielded 79% sensitivity and 67% specificity.

Conclusions

FLRV_% is significantly predictive of PHLF after MH, with over half of patients with PHLF having FLRV_% < 30%. In light of this, we propose that all patients should undergo risk stratification prior to MH, with the high risk patients additionally being assessed with CT volumetry.

Classification of Adverse Events in Adult Surgery

Successful surgery combines quality (achievement of a positive outcome) with safety (avoidance of a negative outcome). Outcome assessment serves the purpose of quality improvement in health care by establishing performance indicators and allowing the identification of performance gaps. Novel surgical quality metric tools (benchmark cutoffs and textbook outcomes) provide procedure-specific ideal surgical outcomes in a subgroup of well-defined low-risk patients, with the aim of setting realistic and best achievable goals for surgeons and centers, as well as supporting unbiased comparison of surgical quality between centers and periods of time. Validated classification systems have been deployed to grade adverse events during the surgical journey: (1) the ClassIntra classification for the intraoperative period; (2) the Clavien-Dindo classification for the gravity of single adverse events; and the (3) Comprehensive Complication Index (CCI) for the sum of adverse events over a defined postoperative period. The failure to rescue rate refers to the death of a patient following one or more potentially treatable postoperative adverse event(s) and is a reliable proxy of the institutional safety culture and infrastructure. Complication assessment is undergoing digital transformation to decrease resource-intensity and provide surgeons with real-time pre- or intraoperative decision support. Standardized reporting of complications informs patients on their chances to realize favorable postoperative outcomes and assists surgical centers in the prioritization of quality improvement initiatives, multidisciplinary teamwork, surgical education, and ultimately, in the enhancement of clinical standards.

Pushing the Limits of Surgical Resection in Colorectal Liver Metastasis: How Far Can We Go?

Colorectal cancer is the third most common cancer worldwide, and up to 50% of all patients diagnosed will develop metastatic disease. Management of colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) has been constantly improving, aided by newer and more effective chemotherapy agents and the use of multidisciplinary teams. However, the only curative treatment remains surgical resection of the CRLM. Although survival for surgically resected patients has shown modest improvement, this is mostly because of the fact that what is constantly evolving is the indication for resection. Surgeons are constantly pushing the limits of what is considered resectable or not, thus enhancing and enlarging the pool of patients who can be potentially benefited and even cured with aggressive surgical procedures. There are a variety of procedures that have been developed, which range from procedures to stimulate hepatic growth, such as portal vein embolization, two-staged hepatectomy, or the association of both, to technically challenging procedures such as simultaneous approaches for synchronous metastasis, ex-vivo or in-situ perfusion with total vascular exclusion, or even liver transplant. This article reviewed the major breakthroughs in liver surgery for CRLM, showing how much has changed and what has been achieved in the field of CRLM.

Consensus recommendations on how to assess the quality of surgical interventions

Postoperative complications represent a major public health burden worldwide. Without standardized, clinically relevant and universally applied endpoints, the evaluation of surgical interventions remains ill-defined and inconsistent, opening the door for biased interpretations and hampering patient-centered health care delivery. We conducted a Jury-based consensus conference incorporating the perspectives of different stakeholders, who based their recommendations on the work of nine panels of experts. The recommendations cover the selection of postoperative outcomes from the perspective of patients and other stakeholders, comparison and interpretation of outcomes, consideration of cultural and demographic factors, and strategies to deal with unwarranted outcomes. With the recommendations developed exclusively by the Jury, we provide a framework for surgical outcome assessment and quality improvement after medical interventions, that integrates the main stakeholders' perspectives.

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.

Early Prediction of a Serious Postoperative Course in Perihilar Cholangiocarcinoma: Trajectory Analysis of the Comprehensive Complication Index

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to visualize the postoperative clinical course using the comprehensive complication index (CCI) and to propose an early alarming sign for subsequent serious outcomes in perihilar cholangiocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND

Surgery for this disease carries a high risk of morbidity and mortality. The developmental course of the overall morbidity burden and its clinical utility are unknown.

METHODS

Patients who underwent major hepatectomy for perihilar cholan-giocarcinoma between 2010 and 2019 were reviewed retrospectively. All postoperative complications were evaluated according to the Clavien-Dindo classification (CDC), and the CCI was calculated on a daily basis until postoperative day 14 to construct an accumulating graph as a trajectory. Group-based trajectory modeling was conducted to categorize the trajectory into clinically distinct patterns and the predictive power of early CCI for a subsequent serious course was assessed.

RESULTS

A total of 4230 complications occurred in the 484 study patients (CDC grade I, n = 27; II, n = 132; IlIa, n = 290; IIIb, n = 4; IVa, n = 21; IVb, n = 1; and V, n = 9). The trajectory was categorized into 3 patterns: mild (n = 209), moderate (n = 235), and severe (n = 40) morbidity courses. The 90-day mortality rate significantly differed among the courses: 0%, 0.9%, and 17.5%, respectively (P<0.001). The cutoff values of the CCI on postoperative days 1, 4, and 7 for predicting a severe morbidity course were 15.0, 28.5, and 40.6 with areas under the curves of 0.780, 0.924, and 0.984, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The CCI could depict the chronological increase in the overall morbidity burden, categorized into 3 patterns. Early CCI potentially predicted sequential progression to serious outcomes.

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.

A critical appraisal of the ISGLS definition of biliary leakage after liver resection

PURPOSE

The International Study Group of Liver Surgery (ISGLS) defined post-hepatectomy biliary leakage as drain/serum bilirubin ratio > 3 at day 3 or the interventional/surgical revision due to biliary peritonitis. We investigated the definition's applicability.

METHODS

A retrospective evaluation of all liver resections over a 6-year period was performed. ROC analyses were performed for drain/serum bilirubin ratios on days 1, 2, and 3 including grade A to C (analysis I) and grade B and C biliary leakages (analysis II) to test specific cutoff values.

RESULTS

A total of 576 patients were included. One hundred nine (18.9%) postoperative bile leakages occurred (19.6% of the whole population grade A, 16.5% grade B/C). Areas under the curve (AUC) for analysis I were 0.841 (day 1), 0.846 (day 2), and 0.734 (day 3). The highest sensitivity (78% on day 1/77% on day 2) and specificity (78% on day 1/79% on day 2) in analysis I were obtained for a drain/serum bilirubin ratio of 2.0. AUCs for analysis II were similar: 0.788 (day 1), 0.791 (day 2), and 0.650 (day 3). The highest sensitivity (73% on day 1/71% on day 2) and specificity (74% on day 1/76% on day 2) in analysis II were detected for a drain/serum bilirubin ratio of 2.0 on postoperative day 2.

CONCLUSION

Biliary leakages should be defined if the drain/serum bilirubin ratio is > 2.0 on postoperative day 2.

Anxiety, pain intensity, and decision regret of living liver donors during postoperative period

AIM

The aim of this study was to explore and examine the relationship between anxiety, acute pain intensity, and decision regret of living liver donors in the postoperative stage.

METHODS

This is a prospective correlational study. Data were collected consecutively for one year (from September 2017 to September 2018) at a medical center in northern Taiwan. Information about anxiety and acute pain intensity was collected preoperatively and on postoperative day (POD) 3 and POD 7. Satisfaction with pain management and decision regret was inquired about on POD 7.

RESULTS

Data of 57 consecutive living liver donors (56.1 % male, mean age 34.12 ± 9.92 years) were analyzed. Living liver donors experienced moderate anxiety and acute pain levels in the postoperative period. The mean score of decision regret was 12.63 (range 0-60), indicating a low level of regret. The acute pain intensity decreased significantly between POD 3 and POD 7 (p < .001); however, the anxiety level slightly increased (p = .031). Older and married living liver donors had higher anxiety levels. The satisfaction level of pain management was negatively correlated with the POD 7 acute pain intensity (r = -0.26, p = .049) and decision regret (r = -0.37, p = .005), but it was positively correlated with POD 7 anxiety (r = 0.38, p = .004).

CONCLUSIONS

The postoperative period was hard for living liver donors as they would experience moderate acute pain and anxiety. Although the decision regret was low, the satisfaction level of pain management would negatively affect it. Therefore, the effectiveness of pain management and anxiety management should be continually ensured in the postoperative period.

Right Lobe Versus Left Lobe Living Donor Liver Transplantation: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Donor and Recipient Outcomes

BACKGROUND

Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) is an established treatment for advanced liver disease. Whether right lobe (RL) or left lobe (LL) LDLT provides the best outcomes for donors and recipients remains contentious.

METHODS

MedLine, Embase, PubMed, and Cochrane Central were searched to identify studies comparing RL- and LL-LDLT and reporting donor and/or recipient outcomes. Effect sizes were pooled using random-effect meta-analysis. Meta-regressions were used to explore heterogeneity.

RESULTS

Sixty-seven studies were included. RL donors were more likely to experience major complications (relative risk [RR] = 1.63; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.30-2.05; I2 = 19%) than LL donors; however, no difference was observed in the risk of any biliary complication (RR = 1.41; 95% CI = 0.91-2.20; I2 = 59%), bile leaks (RR = 1.56; 95% CI = 0.97-2.51; I2 = 52%), biliary strictures (RR = 0.99; 95% CI = 0.43-1.88; I2 = 27%), or postoperative death (RR = 0.51; 95% CI = 0.25-1.05; I2 = 0%). Among recipients, the incidence of major complications (RR = 0.85; 95% CI = 0.68-1.06; I2 = 21%), biliary complications (RR = 1.10; 95% CI = 0.91-1.33; I2 = 8%), and vascular complications (RR = 0.79; 95% CI = 0.44-1.43; I2 = 0%) was similar. Although the rate of small for size syndrome (RR = 0.47; 95% CI = 0.30-0.74; I2 = 0%) and postoperative deaths (RR = 0.62; 95% CI = 0.44-0.87; I2 = 0%) was lower among RL-LDLT recipients, no differences were observed in long-term graft (hazard ratio = 0.87; 95% CI = 0.55-1.38; I2 = 74%) and overall survival (hazard ratio = 0.86; 95% CI = 0.60-1.22; I2 = 44%).

CONCLUSIONS

LL donors experience fewer complications than RL donors, and LL-LDLT recipients had similar outcomes to RL-LDLT recipients. These findings suggest that LL-LDLT offers the best outcomes for living donors and similar outcomes for recipients when measures are taken to prevent small for size syndrome.

Low utilization of adult-to-adult LDLT in Western countries despite excellent outcomes: International multicenter analysis of the US, the UK, and Canada

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Adult-to-adult living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) offers an opportunity to decrease the liver transplant waitlist and reduce waitlist mortality. We sought to compare donor and recipient characteristics and post-transplant outcomes after LDLT in the US, the UK, and Canada.

METHODS

This is a retrospective multicenter cohort-study of adults (≥18-years) who underwent primary LDLT between Jan-2008 and Dec-2018 from three national liver transplantation registries: United Network for Organ Sharing (US), National Health Service Blood and Transplantation (UK), and the Canadian Organ Replacement Registry (Canada). Patients undergoing retransplantation or multi-organ transplantation were excluded. Post-transplant survival was evaluated using the Kaplan-Meier method, and multivariable adjustments were performed using Cox proportional-hazards models with mixed-effect modeling.

RESULTS

A total of 2,954 living donor liver transplants were performed (US: n = 2,328; Canada: n = 529; UK: n = 97). Canada has maintained the highest proportion of LDLT utilization over time (proportion of LDLT in 2008 - US: 3.3%; Canada: 19.5%; UK: 1.7%; p <0.001 - in 2018 - US: 5.0%; Canada: 13.6%; UK: 0.4%; p <0.001). The 1-, 5-, and 10-year patient survival was 92.6%, 82.8%, and 70.0% in the US vs. 96.1%, 89.9%, and 82.2% in Canada vs. 91.4%, 85.4%, and 66.7% in the UK. After adjustment for characteristics of donors, recipients, transplant year, and treating transplant center as a random effect, all countries had a non-statistically significantly different mortality hazard post-LDLT (Ref US: Canada hazard ratio 0.53, 95% CI 0.28-1.01, p = 0.05; UK hazard ratio 1.09, 95% CI 0.59-2.02, p = 0.78).

CONCLUSIONS

The use of LDLT has remained low in the US, the UK and Canada. Despite this, long-term survival is excellent. Continued efforts to increase LDLT utilization in these countries may be warranted due to the growing waitlist and differences in allocation that may disadvantage patients currently awaiting liver transplantation.

LAY SUMMARY

This multicenter international comparative analysis of living donor liver transplantation in the United States, the United Kingdom, and Canada demonstrates that despite low use of the procedure, the long-term outcomes are excellent. In addition, the mortality risk is not statistically significantly different between the evaluated countries. However, the incidence and risk of retransplantation differs between the countries, being the highest in the United Kingdom and lowest in the United States.

Benchmarks in colorectal surgery: multinational study to define quality thresholds in high and low anterior resection

BACKGROUND

Benchmark comparisons in surgery allow identification of gaps in the quality of care provided. The aim of this study was to determine quality thresholds for high (HAR) and low (LAR) anterior resections in colorectal cancer surgery by applying the concept of benchmarking.

METHODS

This 5-year multinational retrospective study included patients who underwent anterior resection for cancer in 19 high-volume centres on five continents. Benchmarks were defined for 11 relevant postoperative variables at discharge, 3 months, and 6 months (for LAR). Benchmarks were calculated for two separate cohorts: patients without (ideal) and those with (non-ideal) outcome-relevant co-morbidities. Benchmark cut-offs were defined as the 75th percentile of each centre's median value.

RESULTS

A total of 3903 patients who underwent HAR and 3726 who had LAR for cancer were analysed. After 3 months' follow-up, the mortality benchmark in HAR for ideal and non-ideal patients was 0.0 versus 3.0 per cent, and in LAR it was 0.0 versus 2.2 per cent. Benchmark results for anastomotic leakage were 5.0 versus 6.9 per cent for HAR, and 13.6 versus 11.8 per cent for LAR. The overall morbidity benchmark in HAR was a Comprehensive Complication Index (CCI®) score of 8.6 versus 14.7, and that for LAR was CCI® score 11.9 versus 18.3.

CONCLUSION

Regular comparison of individual-surgeon or -unit outcome data against benchmark thresholds may identify gaps in care quality that can improve patient outcome.

Novel Benchmark Values for Redo Liver Transplantation: Does the Outcome Justify the Effort?

OBJECTIVE

To define benchmark cutoffs for redo liver transplantation (redo-LT).

BACKGROUND

In the era of organ shortage, redo-LT is frequently discussed in terms of expected poor outcome and wasteful resources. However, there is a lack of benchmark data to reliably evaluate outcomes after redo-LT.

METHODS

We collected data on redo-LT between January 2010 and December 2018 from 22 high-volume transplant centers. Benchmark cases were defined as recipients with model of end stage liver disease (MELD) score ≤25, absence of portal vein thrombosis, no mechanical ventilation at the time of surgery, receiving a graft from a donor after brain death. Also, high-urgent priority and early redo-LT including those for primary nonfunction (PNF) or hepatic artery thrombosis were excluded. Benchmark cutoffs were derived from the 75th percentile of the medians of all benchmark centers.

RESULTS

Of 1110 redo-LT, 373 (34%) cases qualified as benchmark cases. Among these cases, the rate of postoperative complications until discharge was 76%, and increased up to 87% at 1-year, respectively. One-year overall survival rate was excellent with 90%. Benchmark cutoffs included Comprehensive Complication Index CCI ® at 1-year of ≤72, and in-hospital and 1-year mortality rates of ≤13% and ≤15%, respectively. In contrast, patients who received a redo-LT for PNF showed worse outcomes with some values dramatically outside the redo-LT benchmarks.

CONCLUSION

This study shows that redo-LT achieves good outcome when looking at benchmark scenarios. However, this figure changes in high-risk redo-LT, as for example in PNF. This analysis objectifies for the first-time results and efforts for redo-LT and can serve as a basis for discussion about the use of scarce resources.

Liver Transplantation as a New Standard of Care in Patients With Perihilar Cholangiocarcinoma? Results From an International Benchmark Study

OBJECTIVE

To define benchmark values for liver transplantation (LT) in patients with perihilar cholangiocarcinoma (PHC) enabling unbiased comparisons.

BACKGROUND

Transplantation for PHC is used with reluctance in many centers and even contraindicated in several countries. Although benchmark values for LT are available, there is a lack of specific data on LT performed for PHC.

METHODS

PHC patients considered for LT after Mayo-like protocol were analyzed in 17 reference centers in 2 continents over the recent 5-year period (2014-2018). The minimum follow-up was 1 year. Benchmark patients were defined as operated at high-volume centers (≥50 overall LT/year) after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy, with a tumor diameter <3 cm, negative lymph nodes, and with the absence of relevant comorbidities. Benchmark cutoff values were derived from the 75th to 25th percentiles of the median values of all benchmark centers.

RESULTS

One hundred thirty-four consecutive patients underwent LT after completion of the neoadjuvant treatment. Of those, 89.6% qualified as benchmark cases. Benchmark cutoffs were 90-day mortality ≤5.2%; comprehensive complication index at 1 year of ≤33.7; grade ≥3 complication rates ≤66.7%. These values were better than benchmark values for other indications of LT. Five-year disease-free survival was largely superior compared with a matched group of nodal negative patients undergoing curative liver resection (n=106) (62% vs 32%, P <0.001).

CONCLUSION

This multicenter benchmark study demonstrates that LT offers excellent outcomes with superior oncological results in early stage PHC patients, even in candidates for surgery. This provocative observation should lead to a change in available therapeutic algorithms for PHC.

Benchmarking of minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy with splenectomy: European multicentre study

Background

Benchmarking is the process to used assess the best achievable results and compare outcomes with that standard. This study aimed to assess best achievable outcomes in minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy with splenectomy (MIDPS).

Methods

This retrospective study included consecutive patients undergoing MIDPS for any indication, between 2003 and 2019, in 31 European centres. Benchmarks of the main clinical outcomes were calculated according to the Achievable Benchmark of Care (ABC™) method. After identifying independent risk factors for severe morbidity and conversion, risk-adjusted ABCs were calculated for each subgroup of patients at risk.

Results

A total of 1595 patients were included. The ABC was 2.5 per cent for conversion and 8.4 per cent for severe morbidity. ABC values were 160 min for duration of operation time, 8.3 per cent for POPF, 1.8 per cent for reoperation, and 0 per cent for mortality. Multivariable analysis showed that conversion was associated with male sex (OR 1.48), BMI exceeding 30 kg/m2 (OR 2.42), multivisceral resection (OR 3.04), and laparoscopy (OR 2.24). Increased risk of severe morbidity was associated with ASA fitness grade above II (OR 1.60), multivisceral resection (OR 1.88), and robotic approach (OR 1.87).

Conclusion

The benchmark values obtained using the ABC method represent optimal outcomes from best achievable care, including low complication rates and zero mortality. These benchmarks should be used to set standards to improve patient outcomes.

Influence of surgical technique in donor hepatectomy on immediate and short-term living donor outcomes - A systematic review of the literature, meta-analysis, and expert panel recommendations

BACKGROUND

There are currently no guidelines pertaining to ERAS pathways in living donor hepatectomy.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to identify whether surgical technique influences immediate and short-term outcomes after living liver donation surgery.

DATA SOURCES

Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Google Scholar, and Cochrane Central.

METHODS

Systematic review and meta-analysis following PRISMA guidelines and recommendations using the GRADE approach derived from an international expert panel (CRD42021260707). Endpoints were mortality, overall complications, serious complications, bile eaks, pulmonary complications, estimated blood loss and length of stay.

RESULTS

Of the 2410 screened articles, 21 articles were included for final analysis; three observational, 13 retrospective cohort, four prospective cohort studies, and one randomized trial. Overall complications were higher with right versus left hepatectomy (26.8% vs. 20.8%; OR 1.4, P = .010). Donors after left hepatectomy had shorter length of stay (MD 1.4 days) compared to right hepatectomy. There was no difference in outcomes after right donor hepatectomy with versus without middle hepatic vein. We had limited data on the influence of incision type and minimally invasive approaches on living donor outcomes, and no data on the effect of operative time on donor outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Left donor hepatectomy should be preferred over right hepatectomy, as it is related to improved donor short-term outcomes (QOE; Moderate | Grade of Recommendation; Strong). Right donor hepatectomy with or without MHV has equivalent outcomes (QOE; Moderate | Grade of Recommendation; Strong); no preference is recommended, decision should be based on program's experience and expertise. No difference in outcomes was observed related to incision type, minimally invasive vs. open (QOE; Low | Grade of Recommendation; Weak); no preference can be recommended.

When is it safe for the liver donor to be discharged home and prevent unnecessary re-hospitalizations? - A systematic review of the literature and expert panel recommendations

BACKGROUND

Few data are available on discharge criteria after living liver donation (LLD).

OBJECTIVES

To identify the features for fit for discharge checklist after LLD to prevent unnecessary re-hospitalizations and to provide international expert recommendations.

DATA SOURCES

Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Google Scholar, and Cochrane Central.

METHODS

Systematic review following PRISMA guidelines and recommendations using the GRADE approach derived from an international expert panel. The critical outcomes included were complications rates and liver function (defined by elevated bilirubin and INR) (CRD42021260725).

RESULTS

Total 57/1710 studies were included in qualitative analysis and 28/57 on the final analysis. No randomized controlled trials were identified. The complications rate was reported in 20/28 studies and ranged from 7.8% to 71.2%. Post hepatectomy liver function was reported in 13 studies. The Quality of Evidence (QoE) was Low and Very-Low for complications rate and liver function test, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Monitoring and prevention of donor complications should be crucial in decision making of discharge. Pain and diet control, removal of all drains and catheters, deep venous thrombosis prophylaxis, and use routine imaging (CT scan or liver ultrasound) before discharge should be included as fit for discharge checklist (QoE; Low | GRADE of recommendation; Strong). Transient Impaired liver function (defined by elevated bilirubin and INR), a prognostic marker of outcome after liver resection, usually occurs after donor right hepatectomy and should be monitored. Improving trends for bilirubin and INR value should be observed by day 5 post hepatectomy and be included in the fit for discharge checklist. (QoE; Very-Low | GRADE; Strong).

The essential requirements for an HPB centre to deliver high-quality outcomes

The concept of a centre approach to the treatment of patients with complex disorders, such as those with hepato-pancreato-biliary (HPB) diseases, is widely applied, although what is needed for an HPB centre to achieve high-quality outcomes remains unclear. We therefore conducted a literature review, which highlighted the paucity of information linking centre structure or process to outcome data outside of caseloads, specialisation, and quality of training. We then conducted an international survey among the largest 107 HPB centres with experts in HPB surgery and found that most responders work in 'virtual' HPB centres without dedicated space, assigned beds, nor personal. We finally analysed our experience with the Swiss HPB centre, previously reported in this journal 15 years ago, disclosing that budget priorities set by the hospital administration may prevent the development of a fully integrated centre, for example through inconsistent assignment of the centre's beds to HBP patients or removal of dedicated intermediate care beds. We propose criteria for essential requirements for an HPB centre to deliver high-quality outcomes, with the concept of "centre of reference" limited to actual, as opposed to virtual, centres.

Long-term follow-up of living liver donors: A single-center experience

Living donors are healthy individuals who are exposed to a major surgical procedure during which a major part of their liver is resected. Data on the long-term consequences of living liver donation are scarce. This study examined clinical, laboratory, and long-term health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in 237 living liver donors and 239 matched controls during 48-168 months of postdonation follow-up. We used the 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36), version 1. The scores for the four following subscales were higher in nondonors than in donors: physical functioning (p = 0.009), role limitations due to physical health (p = 0.002), energy/fatigue (p < 0.001), and bodily pain (p < 0.001). The scores on the eight subscales of the SF-36 were higher in donors with living recipients than in donors whose recipients died (p < 0.001). Our results suggest that living donor right hepatectomy is safe and results in a postdonation HRQoL similar to that of nondonors in those donors whose recipients are healthy, whereas donors whose recipients die have a lower HRQoL that is significantly negatively correlated with the time since recipient death and improves over time.

Do all Patients Get the Same Care Across Hospitals?

There is extensive research demonstrating significant variation in the utilization of surgery and outcomes from surgery, including differences in mortality, complications, readmission, and failure to rescue. Literature suggests that these variations exist across as well as within small area geographies in the United States. There is also significant evidence of variation in access and outcomes from surgery that is attributable to race. Emerging research is demonstrating that there may be some variation attributable to a patient's social determinants of health and their lived averment. Those affected must work together to determine rate of utilization and how much variation is acceptable.