Christoph Kuemmerli1, Marcel André Schneider2, Gaëtan-Romain Joliat3, Beat Moeckli4, Kristjan Ukegjini5, Martin Bolli6, Mathias Worni6,7,8, Dominique Lisa Birrer2. 1. Department of Visceral Surgery, Clarunis, University Center for Gastrointestinal and Liver Disease, St. Clara Hospital and University Hospital, Kleinriehenstrasse 30, 4058, Basel, Switzerland. Christoph.kuemmerli@clarunis.ch. 2. Department of Surgery and Transplantation, University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland. 3. Department of Visceral Surgery, Lausanne University Hospital CHUV, Lausanne, Switzerland. 4. Department of Surgery, Geneva University Hospitals, Geneva, Switzerland. 5. Department of Surgery, Cantonal Hospital of St. Gallen, St. Gallen, Switzerland. 6. Department of Visceral Surgery, Clarunis, University Center for Gastrointestinal and Liver Disease, St. Clara Hospital and University Hospital, Kleinriehenstrasse 30, 4058, Basel, Switzerland. 7. Department of Surgery, Clinic Beau Site, Bern, Switzerland. 8. Swiss Institute for Translational and Entrepreneurial Medicine, Stiftung Lindenhof, Campus SLB, Bern, Switzerland.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Centralisation of highly specialised medicine (HSM) has changed practice and outcome in pancreatic surgery (PS) also in Switzerland. Fewer hospitals are allowed to perform pancreatic surgery according to nationally defined cut-offs. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to examine trends in PS in Switzerland. First, to assess opinions and expected trends among Swiss pancreatic surgeons in regard of PS practice and second, to assess the evolution of PS performance in Switzerland by a nationwide retrospective analysis. METHODS: First, a 26-item survey among all surgeons who performed PS in 2016 in Switzerland was performed. Then, nationwide data from 1998 to 2018 from all hospitals performing PS was analysed including centre volume, perioperative morbidity and mortality, surgical indications and utilisation of minimally invasive pancreatic surgery (MIPS). The national cut-off for regulatory accredited volume centres (AVC) was ≥ 12. Additionally, an international benchmark definition for high volume (≥ 20 surgeries/year) was used. RESULTS: Among 25 surgeons from 15 centres (response rate 51%), the survey revealed agreement that centralisation is important to improve perioperative outcomes. Respondents agreed on a minimum case load per surgeon or centre. Within the nationwide database, 8534 pancreatic resections were identified. Most resections were performed for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (58.9%). There was a significant trend towards centralisation of PS with fewer non-accredited volume centres (nAVC) (36 in 1998 and 17 in 2018, p < 0.001) and more AVC (2 in 1998 and 18 in 2018, p < 0.001). A significantly higher adjusted mortality after pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) was observed in low-volume compared to high-volume hospitals (OR 1.45 [95% CI 1.15-1.84], p = 0.002) and a similar trend compared among AVC and nAVC (OR 1.25 [95% CI 0.98-1.60], p = 0.072), while mortality after distal pancreatectomy (DP) was not influenced by centre volume. CONCLUSIONS: Over the last two decades, centralisation of PS towards higher-volume centres was observed in Switzerland with a decrease of mortality after PD and low mortality after DP. Further centralisation is supported by most pancreatic surgeons. However, the ideal metric and outcome measures for the allocation of highly specialised medicine need further discussion to allow a fair and outcome-focused allocation.
BACKGROUND: Centralisation of highly specialised medicine (HSM) has changed practice and outcome in pancreatic surgery (PS) also in Switzerland. Fewer hospitals are allowed to perform pancreatic surgery according to nationally defined cut-offs. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to examine trends in PS in Switzerland. First, to assess opinions and expected trends among Swiss pancreatic surgeons in regard of PS practice and second, to assess the evolution of PS performance in Switzerland by a nationwide retrospective analysis. METHODS: First, a 26-item survey among all surgeons who performed PS in 2016 in Switzerland was performed. Then, nationwide data from 1998 to 2018 from all hospitals performing PS was analysed including centre volume, perioperative morbidity and mortality, surgical indications and utilisation of minimally invasive pancreatic surgery (MIPS). The national cut-off for regulatory accredited volume centres (AVC) was ≥ 12. Additionally, an international benchmark definition for high volume (≥ 20 surgeries/year) was used. RESULTS: Among 25 surgeons from 15 centres (response rate 51%), the survey revealed agreement that centralisation is important to improve perioperative outcomes. Respondents agreed on a minimum case load per surgeon or centre. Within the nationwide database, 8534 pancreatic resections were identified. Most resections were performed for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (58.9%). There was a significant trend towards centralisation of PS with fewer non-accredited volume centres (nAVC) (36 in 1998 and 17 in 2018, p < 0.001) and more AVC (2 in 1998 and 18 in 2018, p < 0.001). A significantly higher adjusted mortality after pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) was observed in low-volume compared to high-volume hospitals (OR 1.45 [95% CI 1.15-1.84], p = 0.002) and a similar trend compared among AVC and nAVC (OR 1.25 [95% CI 0.98-1.60], p = 0.072), while mortality after distal pancreatectomy (DP) was not influenced by centre volume. CONCLUSIONS: Over the last two decades, centralisation of PS towards higher-volume centres was observed in Switzerland with a decrease of mortality after PD and low mortality after DP. Further centralisation is supported by most pancreatic surgeons. However, the ideal metric and outcome measures for the allocation of highly specialised medicine need further discussion to allow a fair and outcome-focused allocation.
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: N Tjarda van Heek; Koert F D Kuhlmann; Rob J Scholten; Steve M M de Castro; Olivier R C Busch; Thomas M van Gulik; Huug Obertop; Dirk J Gouma Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2005-12 Impact factor: 12.969
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: 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: N Filmann; D Walter; E Schadde; C Bruns; T Keck; H Lang; K Oldhafer; H J Schlitt; M R Schön; E Herrmann; W O Bechstein; A A Schnitzbauer Journal: Br J Surg Date: 2019-07-24 Impact factor: 6.939
Authors: Tarik Ghadban; Matthias Reeh; Maximilian Bockhorn; Rainer Grotelueschen; Kai Bachmann; Katharina Grupp; Faik G Uzunoglu; Jakob R Izbicki; Daniel R Perez Journal: Cancer Manag Res Date: 2019-03-12 Impact factor: 3.989