Lydia G M van der Geest1, L Bengt van Rijssen2, I Quintus Molenaar3, Ignace H de Hingh4, Bas Groot Koerkamp5, Olivier R C Busch2, Valery E P P Lemmens6, Marc G H Besselink2. 1. Department of Research, Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organization (IKNL), Utrecht, The Netherlands. Electronic address: L.vanderGeest@iknl.nl. 2. Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. 3. Department of Surgery, Utrecht Medical Center, Utrecht, The Netherlands. 4. Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, The Netherlands. 5. Department of Surgery, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands. 6. Department of Research, Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organization (IKNL), Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Volume-outcome relationships in pancreatic surgery are well established, but an optimal volume remains to be determined. Studies analyzing outcomes in volume categories exceeding 20 procedures annually are lacking. STUDY DESIGN: A consecutive 3420 patients underwent PD for primary pancreatic or periampullary carcinoma (2005-2013) and were registered in the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Relationships between hospital volume (< 5, 5-19, 20-39 and ≥ 40 PDs/year) and mortality and survival were explored. RESULTS: There was a non-significant decrease in 90-day mortality from 8.1 to 6.7% during the study period (p = 0.23). Ninety-day mortality was 9.7% in centers performing < 5 PDs/year (n = 185 patients), 8.9% for 5-19 PDs/year (n = 1432), 7.3% for 20-39 PDs/year (n = 240) and 4.3% for ≥ 40 PDs/year (n = 562, p = 0.004). Within volume categories, 90-day mortality did not change over time. After adjustment for confounding factors, significantly lower mortality was found in the ≥ 40 category compared to 20-39 PDs/year (OR = 1.72 (1.08-2.74)). Overall survival adjusted for confounding factors was better in the ≥ 40 category compared to categories under 20 PDs/year: HR (≥ 40 vs 5-19/year) = 1.24 (1.09-1.42). In the ≥ 40 category significantly more patients received adjuvant chemotherapy and had > 10 lymph nodes retrieved compared to lower volume categories. CONCLUSIONS: Volume-outcome relationships in pancreatic surgery persist in centers performing ≥ 40 PDs annually, regarding both mortality and survival. The volume plateau for pancreatic surgery has yet to be determined.
BACKGROUND: Volume-outcome relationships in pancreatic surgery are well established, but an optimal volume remains to be determined. Studies analyzing outcomes in volume categories exceeding 20 procedures annually are lacking. STUDY DESIGN: A consecutive 3420 patients underwent PD for primary pancreatic or periampullary carcinoma (2005-2013) and were registered in the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Relationships between hospital volume (< 5, 5-19, 20-39 and ≥ 40 PDs/year) and mortality and survival were explored. RESULTS: There was a non-significant decrease in 90-day mortality from 8.1 to 6.7% during the study period (p = 0.23). Ninety-day mortality was 9.7% in centers performing < 5 PDs/year (n = 185 patients), 8.9% for 5-19 PDs/year (n = 1432), 7.3% for 20-39 PDs/year (n = 240) and 4.3% for ≥ 40 PDs/year (n = 562, p = 0.004). Within volume categories, 90-day mortality did not change over time. After adjustment for confounding factors, significantly lower mortality was found in the ≥ 40 category compared to 20-39 PDs/year (OR = 1.72 (1.08-2.74)). Overall survival adjusted for confounding factors was better in the ≥ 40 category compared to categories under 20 PDs/year: HR (≥ 40 vs 5-19/year) = 1.24 (1.09-1.42). In the ≥ 40 category significantly more patients received adjuvant chemotherapy and had > 10 lymph nodes retrieved compared to lower volume categories. CONCLUSIONS: Volume-outcome relationships in pancreatic surgery persist in centers performing ≥ 40 PDs annually, regarding both mortality and survival. The volume plateau for pancreatic surgery has yet to be determined.
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: Irene Esposito; Jörg Kleeff; Frank Bergmann; Caroline Reiser; Esther Herpel; Helmut Friess; Peter Schirmacher; Markus W Büchler Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2008-03-20 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: G A Gooiker; W van Gijn; M W J M Wouters; P N Post; C J H van de Velde; R A E M Tollenaar Journal: Br J Surg Date: 2011-04 Impact factor: 6.939
Authors: V E P P Lemmens; K Bosscha; G van der Schelling; S Brenninkmeijer; J W W Coebergh; I H J T de Hingh Journal: Br J Surg Date: 2011-06-29 Impact factor: 6.939
Authors: R F de Wilde; M G H Besselink; I van der Tweel; I H J T de Hingh; C H J van Eijck; C H C Dejong; R J Porte; D J Gouma; O R C Busch; I Q Molenaar Journal: Br J Surg Date: 2012-01-11 Impact factor: 6.939
Authors: Joshua S Hill; Zheng Zhou; Jessica P Simons; Sing Chau Ng; Theodore P McDade; Giles F Whalen; Jennifer F Tseng Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2010-02-13 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Lydia G M van der Geest; Marc G H Besselink; Yvette R B M van Gestel; Olivier R C Busch; Ignace H J T de Hingh; Koert P de Jong; I Quintus Molenaar; Valery E P P Lemmens Journal: Acta Oncol Date: 2015-11-09 Impact factor: 4.089
Authors: Gea A Gooiker; Lydia G M van der Geest; Michel W J M Wouters; Marieke Vonk; Tom M Karsten; Rob A E M Tollenaar; Bert A Bonsing Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2011-05-05 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Atsushi Oba; Thomas F Stoop; Matthias Löhr; Thilo Hackert; Nicholas Zyromski; William H Nealon; Michiaki Unno; Richard D Schulick; Mohammed H Al-Musawi; Wenming Wu; Yupei Zhao; Sohei Satoi; Christopher L Wolfgang; Mohammad Abu Hilal; Marc G Besselink; Marco Del Chiaro Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2020-05-01 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Maria S Altieri; Jie Yang; Donald Groves; Donglei Yin; Kristen Cagino; Mark Talamini; Aurora Pryor Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2017-11-03 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Vishes V Mehta; Patricia Friedmann; John C McAuliffe; Peter Muscarella; Haejin In Journal: J Gastrointest Surg Date: 2020-05-06 Impact factor: 3.452