OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to use the concept of benchmarking to establish robust and standardized outcome references after the procedure ALPPS (Associating Liver Partition and Portal Vein Ligation for Staged hepatectomy). BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The recently developed ALPPS procedure, aiming at removing primarily unresectable liver tumors, has been criticized for safety issues with high variations in the reported morbidity/mortality rates depending on patient, disease, technical characteristics, and center experience. No reference values for relevant outcome parameters are available. METHODS: Among 1036 patients registered in the international ALPPS registry, 120 (12%) were benchmark cases fulfilling 4 criteria: patients ≤67 years of age, with colorectal metastases, without simultaneous abdominal procedures, and centers having performed ≥30 cases. Benchmark values, defined as the 75th percentile of the median outcome parameters of the centers, were established for 10 clinically relevant domains. RESULTS: The benchmark values were completion of stage 2: ≥96%, postoperative liver failure (ISGLS-criteria) after stage 2: ≤5%, ICU stay after ALPPS stages 1 and 2: ≤1 and ≤2 days, respectively, interstage interval: ≤16 days, hospital stay after ALPPS stage 2: ≤10 days, rates of overall morbidity in combining both stage 1 and 2: ≤65% and for major complications (grade ≥3a): ≤38%, 90-day comprehensive complication index was ≤22, the 30-, 90-day, and 6-month mortality was ≤4%, ≤5%, and 6%, respectively, the overall 1-year, recurrence-free, liver-tumor-free, and extrahepatic disease-free survival was ≥86%, ≥50%, ≥57%, and ≥65%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: This benchmark analysis sets key reference values for ALPPS, indicating similar outcome as other types of major hepatectomies. Benchmark cutoffs offer valid tools not only for comparisons with other procedures, but also to assess higher risk groups of patients or different indications than colorectal metastases.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to use the concept of benchmarking to establish robust and standardized outcome references after the procedure ALPPS (Associating Liver Partition and Portal Vein Ligation for Staged hepatectomy). BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The recently developed ALPPS procedure, aiming at removing primarily unresectable liver tumors, has been criticized for safety issues with high variations in the reported morbidity/mortality rates depending on patient, disease, technical characteristics, and center experience. No reference values for relevant outcome parameters are available. METHODS: Among 1036 patients registered in the international ALPPS registry, 120 (12%) were benchmark cases fulfilling 4 criteria: patients ≤67 years of age, with colorectal metastases, without simultaneous abdominal procedures, and centers having performed ≥30 cases. Benchmark values, defined as the 75th percentile of the median outcome parameters of the centers, were established for 10 clinically relevant domains. RESULTS: The benchmark values were completion of stage 2: ≥96%, postoperative liver failure (ISGLS-criteria) after stage 2: ≤5%, ICU stay after ALPPS stages 1 and 2: ≤1 and ≤2 days, respectively, interstage interval: ≤16 days, hospital stay after ALPPS stage 2: ≤10 days, rates of overall morbidity in combining both stage 1 and 2: ≤65% and for major complications (grade ≥3a): ≤38%, 90-day comprehensive complication index was ≤22, the 30-, 90-day, and 6-month mortality was ≤4%, ≤5%, and 6%, respectively, the overall 1-year, recurrence-free, liver-tumor-free, and extrahepatic disease-free survival was ≥86%, ≥50%, ≥57%, and ≥65%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: This benchmark analysis sets key reference values for ALPPS, indicating similar outcome as other types of major hepatectomies. Benchmark cutoffs offer valid tools not only for comparisons with other procedures, but also to assess higher risk groups of patients or different indications than colorectal metastases.
Authors: Henrik Petrowsky; Ralph Fritsch; Matthias Guckenberger; Michelle L De Oliveira; Philipp Dutkowski; Pierre-Alain Clavien Journal: Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol Date: 2020-07-17 Impact factor: 46.802
Authors: Vladislav Treska; Jan Bruha; Vaclav Liska; Jakub Fichtl; Kristyna Prochazkova; Tereza Petrakova; Petr Hosek Journal: In Vivo Date: 2020 Sep-Oct Impact factor: 2.155
Authors: Richard Drexler; Sharona Ben-Haim; Christian G Bien; Valeri Borger; Francesco Cardinale; Alexandre Carpentier; Fernando Cendes; Sarat Chandra; Hans Clusmann; Albert Colon; Marco de Curtis; Daniel Delev; Giuseppe Didato; Lasse Dührsen; Jibril Osman Farah; Marc Guenot; Saadi Ghatan; Claire Haegelen; Hajo Hamer; Jason S Hauptmann; Rosalind L Jeffree; Thilo Kalbhenn; Josua Kegele; Niklaus Krayenbühl; Johannes Lang; Bertrand Mathon; Georgios Naros; Julia Onken; Fedor Panov; Christian Raftopoulos; Franz L Ricklefs; Kim Rijkers; Michele Rizzi; Karl Rössler; Olaf Schijns; Ulf C Schneider; Andrea Spyrantis; Adam Strzelczyk; Stefan Stodieck; Manjari Tripathi; Sumeet Vadera; Mario A Alonso-Vanegas; José Géraldo Ribero Vaz; Jörg Wellmer; Tim Wehner; Manfred Westphal; Thomas Sauvigny Journal: Front Neurol Date: 2021-12-13 Impact factor: 4.003
Authors: Tommaso M Manzia; Alessandro Parente; Ilaria Lenci; Bruno Sensi; Martina Milana; Carlo Gazia; Alessandro Signorello; Roberta Angelico; Giuseppe Grassi; Giuseppe Tisone; Leonardo Baiocchi Journal: World J Gastrointest Oncol Date: 2021-12-15
Authors: Philip C Müller; Michael Linecker; Elvan O Kirimker; Christian E Oberkofler; Pierre-Alain Clavien; Deniz Balci; Henrik Petrowsky Journal: Langenbecks Arch Surg Date: 2021-03-19 Impact factor: 3.445