INTRODUCTION: Although mortality rates from pancreatectomy have decreased worldwide, death remains an infrequent but profound event at an individual practice level. Root-cause analysis is a retrospective method commonly employed to understand adverse events. We evaluate whether emerging mortality risk assessment tools sufficiently predict and account for actual clinical events that are often identified by root-cause analysis. METHODS: We assembled a Pancreatic Surgery Mortality Study Group comprised of 36 pancreatic surgeons from 15 institutions in 4 countries. Mortalities after pancreatectomy (30 and 90 days) were accrued from 2000 to 2010. For root-cause analysis, each surgeon "deconstructed" the clinical events preceding a death to determine cause. We next tested whether mortality risk assessment tools (ASA, POSSUM, Charlson, SOAR, and NSQIP) could predict those patients who would die (n = 218) and compared their prognostic accuracy against a cohort of resections in which no patient died (n = 1,177). RESULTS: Two hundred eighteen deaths (184 Whipple's resection, 18 distal pancreatectomies, and 16 total pancreatectomies) were identified from 11,559 pancreatectomies performed by surgeons whose experience averaged 14.5 years. Overall 30- and 90-day mortalities were 0.96% and 1.89%, respectively. Individual surgeon rates ranged from 0% to 4.7%. Only 5 patients died intraoperatively, while the other 213 succumbed at a median of 29 days. Mean patient age was 70 years old (38% were >75 years old). Malignancy was the indication in 90% of cases, mostly pancreatic cancer (57%). Median operative time was 365 min and estimated blood loss was 700 cc (range, 100-16,000 cc). Vascular repair or multivisceral resections were required for 19.7% and 15.1%, respectively. Seventy-seven percent had a variety of major complications before death. Eighty-seven percent required intensive care unit care, 55% were transfused, and 35% were reoperated upon. Fifty percent died during the index admission, while another 11% died after a readmission. Almost half (n = 107) expired between 31 and 90 days. Only 11% had autopsies. Operation-related complications contributed to 40% of deaths, with pancreatic fistula being the most evident (14%). Technical errors (21%) and poor patient selection (15%) were cited by surgeons. Of deaths, 5.5% had associated cancer progression-all occurring between 31 and 90 days. Even after root-cause scrutiny, the ultimate cause of death could not be determined for a quarter of the patients-most often between 31 and 90 days. While assorted risk models predicted mortality with variable discrimination from nonmortalities, they consistently underestimated the actual mortality events we report. CONCLUSION: Root-cause analysis suggests that risk prediction should include, if not emphasize, operative factors related to pancreatectomy. While risk models can distinguish between mortalities and nonmortalities in a collective fashion, they vastly miscalculate the actual chance of death on an individual basis. This study reveals the contributions of both comorbidities and aggressive surgical decisions to mortality.
INTRODUCTION: Although mortality rates from pancreatectomy have decreased worldwide, death remains an infrequent but profound event at an individual practice level. Root-cause analysis is a retrospective method commonly employed to understand adverse events. We evaluate whether emerging mortality risk assessment tools sufficiently predict and account for actual clinical events that are often identified by root-cause analysis. METHODS: We assembled a Pancreatic Surgery Mortality Study Group comprised of 36 pancreatic surgeons from 15 institutions in 4 countries. Mortalities after pancreatectomy (30 and 90 days) were accrued from 2000 to 2010. For root-cause analysis, each surgeon "deconstructed" the clinical events preceding a death to determine cause. We next tested whether mortality risk assessment tools (ASA, POSSUM, Charlson, SOAR, and NSQIP) could predict those patients who would die (n = 218) and compared their prognostic accuracy against a cohort of resections in which no patient died (n = 1,177). RESULTS: Two hundred eighteen deaths (184 Whipple's resection, 18 distal pancreatectomies, and 16 total pancreatectomies) were identified from 11,559 pancreatectomies performed by surgeons whose experience averaged 14.5 years. Overall 30- and 90-day mortalities were 0.96% and 1.89%, respectively. Individual surgeon rates ranged from 0% to 4.7%. Only 5 patients died intraoperatively, while the other 213 succumbed at a median of 29 days. Mean patient age was 70 years old (38% were >75 years old). Malignancy was the indication in 90% of cases, mostly pancreatic cancer (57%). Median operative time was 365 min and estimated blood loss was 700 cc (range, 100-16,000 cc). Vascular repair or multivisceral resections were required for 19.7% and 15.1%, respectively. Seventy-seven percent had a variety of major complications before death. Eighty-seven percent required intensive care unit care, 55% were transfused, and 35% were reoperated upon. Fifty percent died during the index admission, while another 11% died after a readmission. Almost half (n = 107) expired between 31 and 90 days. Only 11% had autopsies. Operation-related complications contributed to 40% of deaths, with pancreatic fistula being the most evident (14%). Technical errors (21%) and poor patient selection (15%) were cited by surgeons. Of deaths, 5.5% had associated cancer progression-all occurring between 31 and 90 days. Even after root-cause scrutiny, the ultimate cause of death could not be determined for a quarter of the patients-most often between 31 and 90 days. While assorted risk models predicted mortality with variable discrimination from nonmortalities, they consistently underestimated the actual mortality events we report. CONCLUSION: Root-cause analysis suggests that risk prediction should include, if not emphasize, operative factors related to pancreatectomy. While risk models can distinguish between mortalities and nonmortalities in a collective fashion, they vastly miscalculate the actual chance of death on an individual basis. This study reveals the contributions of both comorbidities and aggressive surgical decisions to mortality.
Authors: John D Birkmeyer; Andrea E Siewers; Emily V A Finlayson; Therese A Stukel; F Lee Lucas; Ida Batista; H Gilbert Welch; David E Wennberg Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2002-04-11 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: David Yu Greenblatt; Kaitlyn J Kelly; Victoria Rajamanickam; Yin Wan; Todd Hanson; Robert Rettammel; Emily R Winslow; Clifford S Cho; Sharon M Weber Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2011-02-20 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Ahmed R Ahmed; Danilo Miskovic; Thormela Vijayaseelan; William O'Malley; George B Hanna Journal: Surg Obes Relat Dis Date: 2011-01-14 Impact factor: 4.734
Authors: P S Kamath; R H Wiesner; M Malinchoc; W Kremers; T M Therneau; C L Kosberg; G D'Amico; E R Dickson; W R Kim Journal: Hepatology Date: 2001-02 Impact factor: 17.425
Authors: Melissa M Murphy; William J Knaus; Sing Chau Ng; Joshua S Hill; James T McPhee; Shimul A Shah; Jennifer F Tseng Journal: HPB (Oxford) Date: 2009-09 Impact factor: 3.647
Authors: Shahid G Farid; Gavin A Falk; Daniel Joyce; Sricharan Chalikonda; R Matthew Walsh; Andrew M Smith; Gareth Morris-Stiff Journal: HPB (Oxford) Date: 2012-11-19 Impact factor: 3.647
Authors: Ching-Wei D Tzeng; Matthew H G Katz; Jason B Fleming; Jeffrey E Lee; Peter W T Pisters; Holly M Holmes; Gauri R Varadhachary; Robert A Wolff; James L Abbruzzese; Jean-Nicolas Vauthey; Thomas A Aloia Journal: J Gastrointest Surg Date: 2013-10-16 Impact factor: 3.452
Authors: Jason W Denbo; Morgan L Bruno; Jordan M Cloyd; Laura Prakash; Jeffrey E Lee; Michael Kim; Christopher H Crane; Eugene J Koay; Sunil Krishnan; Prajnan Das; Bruce D Minsky; Gauri Varadhachary; Rachna Shroff; Robert Wolff; Milind Javle; Michael J Overman; David Fogelman; Thomas A Aloia; Jean-Nicolas Vauthey; Jason B Fleming; Matthew H G Katz Journal: J Gastrointest Surg Date: 2016-10-11 Impact factor: 3.452
Authors: Valerie Hurdle; Jean-Francois Ouellet; Elijah Dixon; Thomas J Howard; Keith D Lillemoe; Charles M Vollmer; Francis R Sutherland; Chad G Ball Journal: Can J Surg Date: 2014-06 Impact factor: 2.089
Authors: John C McAuliffe; Karen Parks; Prakash Kumar; Sandre F McNeal; Desiree E Morgan; John D Christein Journal: HPB (Oxford) Date: 2013-01-10 Impact factor: 3.647