Literature DB >> 23225109

Defining quality for distal pancreatectomy: does the laparoscopic approach protect patients from poor quality outcomes?

Marshall S Baker1, Karen L Sherman, Susan Stocker, Amanda V Hayman, David J Bentrem, Richard A Prinz, Mark S Talamonti.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Established systems for grading postoperative complications do not change the assigned grade when multiple interventions or readmissions are required to manage a complication. Studies using these systems may misrepresent outcomes for the surgical procedures being evaluated. We define a quality outcome for distal pancreatectomy (DP) and use this metric to compare laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) to open distal pancreatectomy (ODP).
METHODS: Records for patients undergoing DP between January 2006 and December 2009 were reviewed. Clavien-Dindo grade IIIb, IV, and V complications were classified as severe adverse--poor quality--postoperative outcomes (SAPOs). II and IIIa complications requiring either significantly prolonged overall lengths of stay including readmissions within 90 days or more than one invasive intervention were also classified as SAPOs.
RESULTS: By Clavien-Dindo system alone, 91 % of DP patients had either no complication or a low/moderate grade (I, II, IIIa) complication. Using our reclassification, however, 25 % had a SAPO. Patients undergoing LDP demonstrated a Clavien-Dindo complication profile identical to that for SDP but demonstrated significantly shorter overall lengths of stay, were less likely to require perioperative transfusion, and less likely to have a SAPO.
CONCLUSIONS: Established systems undergrade the severity of some complications following DP. Using a procedure-specific metric for quality, we demonstrate that LDP affords a higher quality postoperative outcome than ODP.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 23225109     DOI: 10.1007/s11605-012-2104-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg        ISSN: 1091-255X            Impact factor:   3.452


  17 in total

1.  Comparison of outcomes and costs between laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy and open resection at a single center.

Authors:  Adrian M Fox; Kristen Pitzul; Faizal Bhojani; Max Kaplan; Carol-Anne Moulton; Alice C Wei; Ian McGilvray; Sean Cleary; Allan Okrainec
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2011-12-17       Impact factor: 4.584

2.  Laparoscopic vs open distal pancreatectomy: a single-institution comparative study.

Authors:  Sandeep S Vijan; Kamran A Ahmed; William S Harmsen; Florencia G Que; Kaye M Reid-Lombardo; David M Nagorney; John H Donohue; Michael B Farnell; Michael L Kendrick
Journal:  Arch Surg       Date:  2010-07

3.  1423 pancreaticoduodenectomies for pancreatic cancer: A single-institution experience.

Authors:  Jordan M Winter; John L Cameron; Kurtis A Campbell; Meghan A Arnold; David C Chang; Joann Coleman; Mary B Hodgin; Patricia K Sauter; Ralph H Hruban; Taylor S Riall; Richard D Schulick; Michael A Choti; Keith D Lillemoe; Charles J Yeo
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2006-11       Impact factor: 3.452

Review 4.  The accordion severity grading system of surgical complications.

Authors:  Steven M Strasberg; David C Linehan; William G Hawkins
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2009-08       Impact factor: 12.969

5.  Left-sided pancreatectomy: a multicenter comparison of laparoscopic and open approaches.

Authors:  David A Kooby; Theresa Gillespie; David Bentrem; Attila Nakeeb; Max C Schmidt; Nipun B Merchant; Alex A Parikh; Robert C G Martin; Charles R Scoggins; Syed Ahmad; Hong Jin Kim; Jaemin Park; Fabian Johnston; Matthew J Strouch; Alex Menze; Jennifer Rymer; Rebecca McClaine; Steven M Strasberg; Mark S Talamonti; Charles A Staley; Kelly M McMasters; Andrew M Lowy; Johnita Byrd-Sellers; William C Wood; William G Hawkins
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2008-09       Impact factor: 12.969

6.  A multicenter analysis of distal pancreatectomy for adenocarcinoma: is laparoscopic resection appropriate?

Authors:  David A Kooby; William G Hawkins; C Max Schmidt; Sharon M Weber; David J Bentrem; Theresa W Gillespie; Johnita Byrd Sellers; Nipun B Merchant; Charles R Scoggins; Robert C G Martin; Hong Jin Kim; Syed Ahmad; Clifford S Cho; Alexander A Parikh; Carrie K Chu; Nicholas A Hamilton; Courtney J Doyle; Scott Pinchot; Amanda Hayman; Rebecca McClaine; Attila Nakeeb; Charles A Staley; Kelly M McMasters; Keith D Lillemoe
Journal:  J Am Coll Surg       Date:  2010-05       Impact factor: 6.113

7.  Distal pancreatectomy: indications and outcomes in 235 patients.

Authors:  K D Lillemoe; S Kaushal; J L Cameron; T A Sohn; H A Pitt; C J Yeo
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  1999-05       Impact factor: 12.969

8.  Assessment of complications after pancreatic surgery: A novel grading system applied to 633 patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy.

Authors:  Michelle L DeOliveira; Jordan M Winter; Markus Schafer; Steven C Cunningham; John L Cameron; Charles J Yeo; Pierre-Alain Clavien
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2006-12       Impact factor: 12.969

9.  Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy: results on a consecutive series of 58 patients.

Authors:  Gianluigi Melotti; Giovanni Butturini; Micaela Piccoli; Luca Casetti; Claudio Bassi; Barbara Mullineris; Maria Grazia Lazzaretti; Paolo Pederzoli
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2007-07       Impact factor: 12.969

10.  Readmissions following pancreaticoduodenectomy for pancreas cancer: a population-based appraisal.

Authors:  Irina Yermilov; David Bentrem; Evan Sekeris; Sushma Jain; Melinda A Maggard; Clifford Y Ko; James S Tomlinson
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2008-11-11       Impact factor: 5.344

View more
  5 in total

Review 1.  Surgical management of pancreatic neoplasms: what's new?

Authors:  Andreas Karachristos; Nestor F Esnaola
Journal:  Curr Gastroenterol Rep       Date:  2014-08

2.  Robotic surgery for benign duodenal tumors.

Authors:  Stephanie Downs-Canner; Wald J Van der Vliet; Stijn J J Thoolen; Brian A Boone; Amer H Zureikat; Melissa E Hogg; David L Bartlett; Mark P Callery; Tara S Kent; Herbert J Zeh; A James Moser
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2014-10-28       Impact factor: 3.452

3.  The laparoscopic approach to distal pancreatectomy is a value-added proposition for patients undergoing care in moderate-volume and high-volume centers.

Authors:  Emanuel Eguia; Paul C Kuo; Patrick Sweigert; Marc Nelson; Gerard V Aranha; Gerard Abood; Constantine V Godellas; Marshall S Baker
Journal:  Surgery       Date:  2019-05-31       Impact factor: 3.982

Review 4.  Laparoscopic versus open distal pancreatectomy for pancreatic cancer.

Authors:  Deniece Riviere; Kurinchi Selvan Gurusamy; David A Kooby; Charles M Vollmer; Marc G H Besselink; Brian R Davidson; Cornelis J H M van Laarhoven
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2016-04-04

5.  Laparoscopic Distal Pancreatectomy for Cancer Provides Oncologic Outcomes and Overall Survival Identical to Open Distal Pancreatectomy.

Authors:  Olga Kantor; Darren S Bryan; Mark S Talamonti; Waseem Lutfi; Susan Sharpe; David J Winchester; Richard A Prinz; Marshall S Baker
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2017-08-01       Impact factor: 3.452

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.