Yasushi Hasegawa1, Go Wakabayashi2,3, Hiroyuki Nitta2, Takeshi Takahara2, Hirokatsu Katagiri2, Akira Umemura2, Kenji Makabe2, Akira Sasaki2. 1. Department of Surgery, School of Medicine, Iwate Medical University, 19-1, Uchimaru, Morioka City, Iwate, 020-8505, Japan. hasegawayas@yahoo.co.jp. 2. Department of Surgery, School of Medicine, Iwate Medical University, 19-1, Uchimaru, Morioka City, Iwate, 020-8505, Japan. 3. Department of Surgery, Ageo Central General Hospital, 1-10-10, Kashiwaza, Ageo City, Saitama, 362-8588, Japan.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Extending the clinical indications for laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) should be carefully considered based on a surgeon's experience and skill. However, objective indexes to help surgeons assess the estimated difficulty of LLR are scarce. The aim of our study was to develop the first objective numerical rating scale to predict the surgical difficulty of various LLR procedures. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of the operative outcomes of 187 patients who underwent a pure LLR. First, the value of preoperative factors for predicting surgical time was evaluated by multivariate linear regression analyses, and a scoring system was constructed. Next, the integrity of our predictive linear model was evaluated against the documented operative outcomes for patients forming our study group. RESULTS: Four predictive factors were identified and scored based on the weighted contribution of each factor predicting surgical time: extent of resection (scored 0, 2, or 3); location of tumor (scored 0, 1, or 2); obesity (scored 0 or 1); and platelet count (scored 0 or 1). The scores were summed to classify surgical difficulty into three levels: low (total score ≤1); medium (total score 2-3); and high (total score ≥4). Operative outcomes, including surgical time, volume of blood loss, length of hospital stay, and rate of morbidity, were significantly different between the three surgical difficulty levels. CONCLUSION: Our novel model will be useful for surgeons to predict the difficulty of an LLR procedure relative to their own experience and skill.
BACKGROUND: Extending the clinical indications for laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) should be carefully considered based on a surgeon's experience and skill. However, objective indexes to help surgeons assess the estimated difficulty of LLR are scarce. The aim of our study was to develop the first objective numerical rating scale to predict the surgical difficulty of various LLR procedures. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of the operative outcomes of 187 patients who underwent a pure LLR. First, the value of preoperative factors for predicting surgical time was evaluated by multivariate linear regression analyses, and a scoring system was constructed. Next, the integrity of our predictive linear model was evaluated against the documented operative outcomes for patients forming our study group. RESULTS: Four predictive factors were identified and scored based on the weighted contribution of each factor predicting surgical time: extent of resection (scored 0, 2, or 3); location of tumor (scored 0, 1, or 2); obesity (scored 0 or 1); and platelet count (scored 0 or 1). The scores were summed to classify surgical difficulty into three levels: low (total score ≤1); medium (total score 2-3); and high (total score ≥4). Operative outcomes, including surgical time, volume of blood loss, length of hospital stay, and rate of morbidity, were significantly different between the three surgical difficulty levels. CONCLUSION: Our novel model will be useful for surgeons to predict the difficulty of an LLR procedure relative to their own experience and skill.
Entities:
Keywords:
Difficulty; Hepatectomy; Laparoscopic; Liver resection; Prediction; Scoring system
Authors: F Cauchy; D Fuks; T Nomi; L Schwarz; L Barbier; S Dokmak; O Scatton; J Belghiti; O Soubrane; B Gayet Journal: Br J Surg Date: 2015-04-02 Impact factor: 6.939
Authors: Joseph F Buell; Daniel Cherqui; David A Geller; Nicholas O'Rourke; David Iannitti; Ibrahim Dagher; Alan J Koffron; Mark Thomas; Brice Gayet; Ho Seong Han; Go Wakabayashi; Giulio Belli; Hironori Kaneko; Chen-Guo Ker; Olivier Scatton; Alexis Laurent; Eddie K Abdalla; Prosanto Chaudhury; Erik Dutson; Clark Gamblin; Michael D'Angelica; David Nagorney; Giuliano Testa; Daniel Labow; Derrik Manas; Ronnie T Poon; Heidi Nelson; Robert Martin; Bryan Clary; Wright C Pinson; John Martinie; Jean-Nicolas Vauthey; Robert Goldstein; Sasan Roayaie; David Barlet; Joseph Espat; Michael Abecassis; Myrddin Rees; Yuman Fong; Kelly M McMasters; Christoph Broelsch; Ron Busuttil; Jacques Belghiti; Steven Strasberg; Ravi S Chari Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2009-11 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: E Duchalais; N Machairas; S R Kelley; R G Landmann; A Merchea; D T Colibaseanu; K L Mathis; E J Dozois; D W Larson Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2018-03-15 Impact factor: 4.584