Literature DB >> 35025070

Achievement of textbook outcomes and comparisons with benchmark values after laparoscopic left lateral sectionectomy.

Mizelle D'Silva1, Jai Young Cho2, Ho-Seong Han1, Yoo-Seok Yoon1, Hae Won Lee1, Jun Suh Lee1, Boram Lee1, Moonhwan Kim1.   

Abstract

Laparoscopic left lateral sectionectomy (LLLS) is considered a standard approach for patients. Textbook outcomes (TOs) with benchmark values have been developed to help centers assess their outcomes of LLLS. The aim of our study was to identify factors associated with achieving TOs after LLLS. This is a retrospective cohort study including 195 patients undergoing LLLS between January 2004 and December 2018. Our outcomes were compared to benchmark values and graded as similar, better, or worse. A TO was achieved in 106 patients (54.4%). The main determinant for achieving a TO was prolonged hospital stay. Year of surgery [P = 0.002; odds ratio (OR) 3.913, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.666-9.188], American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score (P = 0.015; OR 0.104, 95% CI 0.017-0.650), body mass index (BMI) score (P = 0.075; OR 1.135, 95% CI 0.988-1.304), inflow clamping > 40 min (P = 0.037; OR 0.090, 95% CI 0.009-0.867) and operation time (P = 0.002; OR 0.991, 95% CI 0.985-0.997) were the factors associated with achieving a TO. Our outcomes were similar to the benchmark values for all criteria, except for the transfusion rate (our study vs benchmark values; 6.2% vs 3.8%), which was worse in our patients. We achieved better outcomes with a lower conversion rate (4.6% vs 7.2%), fewer patients requiring massive transfusion (4.1% vs 8.3%), lower rate of prolonged inflow clamping (3.9% vs 6.3%), lower overall complication rate (11.9% vs 19.8%), lower reoperation rate (0% vs 3.4%), and fewer patients with a positive margin (1.5% vs 10.8%). Year of surgery, ASA score, inflow clamping > 40 min and operation time were independently associated with failure to achieve a TO. TOs are useful tools to measure the surgical outcomes and compare surgical performance with benchmark values. TOs also offer a new method to retrospectively compare outcomes.
© 2022. Italian Society of Surgery (SIC).

Entities:  

Keywords:  Benchmark; Laparoscopic hepatectomy; Laparoscopic liver resection; Left lateral sectionectomy; Textbook outcomes

Mesh:

Year:  2022        PMID: 35025070     DOI: 10.1007/s13304-022-01237-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Updates Surg        ISSN: 2038-131X


  22 in total

1.  Learning curve of self-taught laparoscopic liver surgeons in left lateral sectionectomy: results from an international multi-institutional analysis on 245 cases.

Authors:  Francesca Ratti; Leonid I Barkhatov; Federico Tomassini; Federica Cipriani; Airazat M Kazaryan; Bjǿrn Edwin; Mohammad Abu Hilal; Roberto I Troisi; Luca Aldrighetti
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2015-11-16       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 2.  The quality of care. How can it be assessed?

Authors:  A Donabedian
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1988 Sep 23-30       Impact factor: 56.272

3.  Outcomes of major laparoscopic liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma.

Authors:  Hanisah Guro; Jai Young Cho; Ho-Seong Han; Yoo-Seok Yoon; YoungRok Choi; Sungho Kim; Kilhwan Kim; In Gun Hyun
Journal:  Surg Oncol       Date:  2017-11-26       Impact factor: 3.279

4.  Benchmark performance of laparoscopic left lateral sectionectomy and right hepatectomy in expert centers.

Authors:  Christian Hobeika; David Fuks; François Cauchy; Claire Goumard; Brice Gayet; Alexis Laurent; Olivier Soubrane; Ephrem Salamé; Daniel Cherqui; Jean-Marc Regimbeau; Jean-Yves Mabrut; Olivier Scatton; Eric Vibert
Journal:  J Hepatol       Date:  2020-05-11       Impact factor: 25.083

5.  Laparoscopic partial hepatectomy and left lateral segmentectomy: technique and results of a clinical series.

Authors:  H Kaneko; S Takagi; T Shiba
Journal:  Surgery       Date:  1996-09       Impact factor: 3.982

6.  Laparoscopic anatomical (hepatic) left lateral segmentectomy-technical aspects.

Authors:  J S Azagra; M Goergen; E Gilbart; D Jacobs
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  1996-07       Impact factor: 4.584

7.  The international position on laparoscopic liver surgery: The Louisville Statement, 2008.

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

Review 8.  Laparoscopic left lateral hepatic sectionectomy was expected to be the standard for the treatment of left hepatic lobe lesions: A meta-analysis.

Authors:  Zhou Liu; Haolong Ding; Xiaoli Xiong; Yong Huang
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2018-02       Impact factor: 1.817

Review 9.  Laparoscopic liver resection: indications, limitations, and economic aspects.

Authors:  Moritz Schmelzle; Felix Krenzien; Wenzel Schöning; Johann Pratschke
Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Surg       Date:  2020-07-01       Impact factor: 3.445

Review 10.  Appropriate treatment modality for solitary small hepatocellular carcinoma: Radiofrequency ablation vs. resection vs. transplantation?

Authors:  Keun Soo Ahn; Koo Jeong Kang
Journal:  Clin Mol Hepatol       Date:  2019-04-22
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.