Faiz Gani1, Vanessa M Thompson2, David J Bentrem3, Bruce L Hall4, Henry A Pitt5, Timothy M Pawlik6. 1. Department of Surgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA. 2. National Surgical Quality Improvement Program, American College of Surgeons, Chicago, IL, USA. 3. Department of Surgery, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL, USA. 4. Department of Surgery, Washington University in St. Louis School of Medicine, Olin Business School, and BJC Healthcare, St. Louis, MO, USA. 5. Department of Surgery, Lewis Katz School of Medicine at Temple University, Philadelphia, PA, USA. 6. Department of Surgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA. Electronic address: tpawlik1@jhmi.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: National registries have not adequately captured concurrent partial hepatic resections or ablations. Therefore, the aim of this analysis was to describe the patterns of concurrent partial resections and ablations in North America. METHODS: Patients undergoing a hepatic resection were identified using the American College of Surgeons-National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Targeted Hepatectomy database. Perioperative outcomes were compared for patients undergoing concurrent "wedge" resections and/or ablations and other subsets. RESULTS: A total of 2714 patients were identified who met inclusion criteria. Major hepatectomy was performed in 1037 patients (38.2%) while partial lobectomy was performed in 1677 (61.8%) patients. Concurrent "wedge" hepatic resections and ablations were undertaken in 56.0% and 14.2% of patients, respectively, and were more frequently performed among patients undergoing a partial lobectomy and among patients undergoing surgery for colorectal liver metastasis (both p < 0.001). While associated with a decreased incidence of postoperative complications (p = 0.027) and liver failure (p = 0.031) among patients undergoing a major hepatectomy, concurrent therapies were associated with comparable 30-day outcomes for patients undergoing partial lobectomy. CONCLUSION: Concurrent "wedge" hepatic resections and ablations are performed in 56.0% and 14.2%, respectively of patients undergoing hepatectomy. Concurrent procedures were not associated with worse clinical outcomes.
BACKGROUND: National registries have not adequately captured concurrent partial hepatic resections or ablations. Therefore, the aim of this analysis was to describe the patterns of concurrent partial resections and ablations in North America. METHODS:Patients undergoing a hepatic resection were identified using the American College of Surgeons-National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Targeted Hepatectomy database. Perioperative outcomes were compared for patients undergoing concurrent "wedge" resections and/or ablations and other subsets. RESULTS: A total of 2714 patients were identified who met inclusion criteria. Major hepatectomy was performed in 1037 patients (38.2%) while partial lobectomy was performed in 1677 (61.8%) patients. Concurrent "wedge" hepatic resections and ablations were undertaken in 56.0% and 14.2% of patients, respectively, and were more frequently performed among patients undergoing a partial lobectomy and among patients undergoing surgery for colorectal liver metastasis (both p < 0.001). While associated with a decreased incidence of postoperative complications (p = 0.027) and liver failure (p = 0.031) among patients undergoing a major hepatectomy, concurrent therapies were associated with comparable 30-day outcomes for patients undergoing partial lobectomy. CONCLUSION: Concurrent "wedge" hepatic resections and ablations are performed in 56.0% and 14.2%, respectively of patients undergoing hepatectomy. Concurrent procedures were not associated with worse clinical outcomes.
Authors: Justin B Dimick; Reid M Wainess; John A Cowan; Gilbert R Upchurch; James A Knol; Lisa M Colletti Journal: J Am Coll Surg Date: 2004-07 Impact factor: 6.113
Authors: William C Chapman; Goran Klintmalm; Alan Hemming; Neeta Vachharajani; Maria B Majella Doyle; Ron DeMatteo; Victor Zaydfudim; Haniee Chung; Keith Cavaness; Robert Goldstein; Ivan Zendajas; Laleh G Melstrom; David Nagorney; William Jarnagin Journal: J Am Coll Surg Date: 2015-01-06 Impact factor: 6.113
Authors: Federica Cipriani; Vishal G Shelat; Majd Rawashdeh; Elisa Francone; Luca Aldrighetti; Arjun Takhar; Thomas Armstrong; Neil W Pearce; Mohammad Abu Hilal Journal: J Am Coll Surg Date: 2015-03-27 Impact factor: 6.113
Authors: Nuh N Rahbari; O James Garden; Robert Padbury; Mark Brooke-Smith; Michael Crawford; Rene Adam; Moritz Koch; Masatoshi Makuuchi; Ronald P Dematteo; Christopher Christophi; Simon Banting; Val Usatoff; Masato Nagino; Guy Maddern; Thomas J Hugh; Jean-Nicolas Vauthey; Paul Greig; Myrddin Rees; Yukihiro Yokoyama; Sheung Tat Fan; Yuji Nimura; Joan Figueras; Lorenzo Capussotti; Markus W Büchler; Jürgen Weitz Journal: Surgery Date: 2011-01-14 Impact factor: 3.982
Authors: Skye C Mayo; Jennifer E Heckman; Andrew D Shore; Hari Nathan; Alexander A Parikh; John F P Bridges; Robert A Anders; Daniel A Anaya; Natasha S Becker; Timothy M Pawlik Journal: Surgery Date: 2011-08 Impact factor: 3.982
Authors: Jason M Foster; Hisakazu Hoshi; John F Gibbs; Renuka Iyer; Miland Javle; Quyen Chu; Boris Kuvshinoff Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2006-11-11 Impact factor: 5.344