Cargando…
Practice variation and outcomes of minimally invasive minor liver resections in patients with colorectal liver metastases: a population-based study
INTRODUCTION: In 2017, the Southampton guideline stated that minimally invasive liver resections (MILR) should considered standard practice for minor liver resections. This study aimed to assess recent implementation rates of minor MILR, factors associated with performing MILR, hospital variation, a...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer US
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10338622/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37072639 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00464-023-10010-3 |
_version_ | 1785071667115982848 |
---|---|
author | de Graaff, Michelle R. Klaase, Joost M. de Kleine, Ruben Elfrink, Arthur K. E. Swijnenburg, Rutger-Jan M. Zonderhuis, Babs D. Mieog, J. Sven Derksen, Wouter J. M. Hagendoorn, Jeroen van den Boezem, Peter B. Rijken, Arjen M. Gobardhan, Paul D. Marsman, Hendrik A. Liem, Mike S. L. Leclercq, Wouter K. G. van Heek, Tjarda N. T. Pantijn, Gijs A. Bosscha, Koop Belt, Eric J. T. Vermaas, Maarten Torrenga, Hans Manusama, Eric R. van den Tol, Petrousjka Oosterling, Steven J. den Dulk, Marcel Grünhagen, Dirk J. Kok, Niels F. M. |
author_facet | de Graaff, Michelle R. Klaase, Joost M. de Kleine, Ruben Elfrink, Arthur K. E. Swijnenburg, Rutger-Jan M. Zonderhuis, Babs D. Mieog, J. Sven Derksen, Wouter J. M. Hagendoorn, Jeroen van den Boezem, Peter B. Rijken, Arjen M. Gobardhan, Paul D. Marsman, Hendrik A. Liem, Mike S. L. Leclercq, Wouter K. G. van Heek, Tjarda N. T. Pantijn, Gijs A. Bosscha, Koop Belt, Eric J. T. Vermaas, Maarten Torrenga, Hans Manusama, Eric R. van den Tol, Petrousjka Oosterling, Steven J. den Dulk, Marcel Grünhagen, Dirk J. Kok, Niels F. M. |
author_sort | de Graaff, Michelle R. |
collection | PubMed |
description | INTRODUCTION: In 2017, the Southampton guideline stated that minimally invasive liver resections (MILR) should considered standard practice for minor liver resections. This study aimed to assess recent implementation rates of minor MILR, factors associated with performing MILR, hospital variation, and outcomes in patients with colorectal liver metastases (CRLM). METHODS: This population-based study included all patients who underwent minor liver resection for CRLM in the Netherlands between 2014 and 2021. Factors associated with MILR and nationwide hospital variation were assessed using multilevel multivariable logistic regression. Propensity-score matching (PSM) was applied to compare outcomes between minor MILR and minor open liver resections. Overall survival (OS) was assessed with Kaplan–Meier analysis on patients operated until 2018. RESULTS: Of 4,488 patients included, 1,695 (37.8%) underwent MILR. PSM resulted in 1,338 patients in each group. Implementation of MILR increased to 51.2% in 2021. Factors associated with not performing MILR included treatment with preoperative chemotherapy (aOR 0.61 CI:0.50–0.75, p < 0.001), treatment in a tertiary referral hospital (aOR 0.57 CI:0.50–0.67, p < 0.001), and larger diameter and number of CRLM. Significant hospital variation was observed in use of MILR (7.5% to 93.0%). After case-mix correction, six hospitals performed fewer, and six hospitals performed more MILRs than expected. In the PSM cohort, MILR was associated with a decrease in blood loss (aOR 0.99 CI:0.99–0.99, p < 0.01), cardiac complications (aOR 0.29, CI:0.10–0.70, p = 0.009), IC admissions (aOR 0.66, CI:0.50–0.89, p = 0.005), and shorter hospital stay (aOR CI:0.94–0.99, p < 0.01). Five-year OS rates for MILR and OLR were 53.7% versus 48.6%, p = 0.21. CONCLUSION: Although uptake of MILR is increasing in the Netherlands, significant hospital variation remains. MILR benefits short-term outcomes, while overall survival is comparable to open liver surgery. GRAPHICAL ABSTRACT: [Image: see text] SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00464-023-10010-3. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10338622 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | Springer US |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-103386222023-07-14 Practice variation and outcomes of minimally invasive minor liver resections in patients with colorectal liver metastases: a population-based study de Graaff, Michelle R. Klaase, Joost M. de Kleine, Ruben Elfrink, Arthur K. E. Swijnenburg, Rutger-Jan M. Zonderhuis, Babs D. Mieog, J. Sven Derksen, Wouter J. M. Hagendoorn, Jeroen van den Boezem, Peter B. Rijken, Arjen M. Gobardhan, Paul D. Marsman, Hendrik A. Liem, Mike S. L. Leclercq, Wouter K. G. van Heek, Tjarda N. T. Pantijn, Gijs A. Bosscha, Koop Belt, Eric J. T. Vermaas, Maarten Torrenga, Hans Manusama, Eric R. van den Tol, Petrousjka Oosterling, Steven J. den Dulk, Marcel Grünhagen, Dirk J. Kok, Niels F. M. Surg Endosc Article INTRODUCTION: In 2017, the Southampton guideline stated that minimally invasive liver resections (MILR) should considered standard practice for minor liver resections. This study aimed to assess recent implementation rates of minor MILR, factors associated with performing MILR, hospital variation, and outcomes in patients with colorectal liver metastases (CRLM). METHODS: This population-based study included all patients who underwent minor liver resection for CRLM in the Netherlands between 2014 and 2021. Factors associated with MILR and nationwide hospital variation were assessed using multilevel multivariable logistic regression. Propensity-score matching (PSM) was applied to compare outcomes between minor MILR and minor open liver resections. Overall survival (OS) was assessed with Kaplan–Meier analysis on patients operated until 2018. RESULTS: Of 4,488 patients included, 1,695 (37.8%) underwent MILR. PSM resulted in 1,338 patients in each group. Implementation of MILR increased to 51.2% in 2021. Factors associated with not performing MILR included treatment with preoperative chemotherapy (aOR 0.61 CI:0.50–0.75, p < 0.001), treatment in a tertiary referral hospital (aOR 0.57 CI:0.50–0.67, p < 0.001), and larger diameter and number of CRLM. Significant hospital variation was observed in use of MILR (7.5% to 93.0%). After case-mix correction, six hospitals performed fewer, and six hospitals performed more MILRs than expected. In the PSM cohort, MILR was associated with a decrease in blood loss (aOR 0.99 CI:0.99–0.99, p < 0.01), cardiac complications (aOR 0.29, CI:0.10–0.70, p = 0.009), IC admissions (aOR 0.66, CI:0.50–0.89, p = 0.005), and shorter hospital stay (aOR CI:0.94–0.99, p < 0.01). Five-year OS rates for MILR and OLR were 53.7% versus 48.6%, p = 0.21. CONCLUSION: Although uptake of MILR is increasing in the Netherlands, significant hospital variation remains. MILR benefits short-term outcomes, while overall survival is comparable to open liver surgery. GRAPHICAL ABSTRACT: [Image: see text] SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00464-023-10010-3. Springer US 2023-04-18 2023 /pmc/articles/PMC10338622/ /pubmed/37072639 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00464-023-10010-3 Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Article de Graaff, Michelle R. Klaase, Joost M. de Kleine, Ruben Elfrink, Arthur K. E. Swijnenburg, Rutger-Jan M. Zonderhuis, Babs D. Mieog, J. Sven Derksen, Wouter J. M. Hagendoorn, Jeroen van den Boezem, Peter B. Rijken, Arjen M. Gobardhan, Paul D. Marsman, Hendrik A. Liem, Mike S. L. Leclercq, Wouter K. G. van Heek, Tjarda N. T. Pantijn, Gijs A. Bosscha, Koop Belt, Eric J. T. Vermaas, Maarten Torrenga, Hans Manusama, Eric R. van den Tol, Petrousjka Oosterling, Steven J. den Dulk, Marcel Grünhagen, Dirk J. Kok, Niels F. M. Practice variation and outcomes of minimally invasive minor liver resections in patients with colorectal liver metastases: a population-based study |
title | Practice variation and outcomes of minimally invasive minor liver resections in patients with colorectal liver metastases: a population-based study |
title_full | Practice variation and outcomes of minimally invasive minor liver resections in patients with colorectal liver metastases: a population-based study |
title_fullStr | Practice variation and outcomes of minimally invasive minor liver resections in patients with colorectal liver metastases: a population-based study |
title_full_unstemmed | Practice variation and outcomes of minimally invasive minor liver resections in patients with colorectal liver metastases: a population-based study |
title_short | Practice variation and outcomes of minimally invasive minor liver resections in patients with colorectal liver metastases: a population-based study |
title_sort | practice variation and outcomes of minimally invasive minor liver resections in patients with colorectal liver metastases: a population-based study |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10338622/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37072639 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00464-023-10010-3 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT degraaffmicheller practicevariationandoutcomesofminimallyinvasiveminorliverresectionsinpatientswithcolorectallivermetastasesapopulationbasedstudy AT klaasejoostm practicevariationandoutcomesofminimallyinvasiveminorliverresectionsinpatientswithcolorectallivermetastasesapopulationbasedstudy AT dekleineruben practicevariationandoutcomesofminimallyinvasiveminorliverresectionsinpatientswithcolorectallivermetastasesapopulationbasedstudy AT elfrinkarthurke practicevariationandoutcomesofminimallyinvasiveminorliverresectionsinpatientswithcolorectallivermetastasesapopulationbasedstudy AT swijnenburgrutgerjan practicevariationandoutcomesofminimallyinvasiveminorliverresectionsinpatientswithcolorectallivermetastasesapopulationbasedstudy AT mzonderhuisbabs practicevariationandoutcomesofminimallyinvasiveminorliverresectionsinpatientswithcolorectallivermetastasesapopulationbasedstudy AT dmieogjsven practicevariationandoutcomesofminimallyinvasiveminorliverresectionsinpatientswithcolorectallivermetastasesapopulationbasedstudy AT derksenwouterjm practicevariationandoutcomesofminimallyinvasiveminorliverresectionsinpatientswithcolorectallivermetastasesapopulationbasedstudy AT hagendoornjeroen practicevariationandoutcomesofminimallyinvasiveminorliverresectionsinpatientswithcolorectallivermetastasesapopulationbasedstudy AT vandenboezempeterb practicevariationandoutcomesofminimallyinvasiveminorliverresectionsinpatientswithcolorectallivermetastasesapopulationbasedstudy AT rijkenarjenm practicevariationandoutcomesofminimallyinvasiveminorliverresectionsinpatientswithcolorectallivermetastasesapopulationbasedstudy AT gobardhanpauld practicevariationandoutcomesofminimallyinvasiveminorliverresectionsinpatientswithcolorectallivermetastasesapopulationbasedstudy AT marsmanhendrika practicevariationandoutcomesofminimallyinvasiveminorliverresectionsinpatientswithcolorectallivermetastasesapopulationbasedstudy AT liemmikesl practicevariationandoutcomesofminimallyinvasiveminorliverresectionsinpatientswithcolorectallivermetastasesapopulationbasedstudy AT leclercqwouterkg practicevariationandoutcomesofminimallyinvasiveminorliverresectionsinpatientswithcolorectallivermetastasesapopulationbasedstudy AT vanheektjardant practicevariationandoutcomesofminimallyinvasiveminorliverresectionsinpatientswithcolorectallivermetastasesapopulationbasedstudy AT pantijngijsa practicevariationandoutcomesofminimallyinvasiveminorliverresectionsinpatientswithcolorectallivermetastasesapopulationbasedstudy AT bosschakoop practicevariationandoutcomesofminimallyinvasiveminorliverresectionsinpatientswithcolorectallivermetastasesapopulationbasedstudy AT beltericjt practicevariationandoutcomesofminimallyinvasiveminorliverresectionsinpatientswithcolorectallivermetastasesapopulationbasedstudy AT vermaasmaarten practicevariationandoutcomesofminimallyinvasiveminorliverresectionsinpatientswithcolorectallivermetastasesapopulationbasedstudy AT torrengahans practicevariationandoutcomesofminimallyinvasiveminorliverresectionsinpatientswithcolorectallivermetastasesapopulationbasedstudy AT manusamaericr practicevariationandoutcomesofminimallyinvasiveminorliverresectionsinpatientswithcolorectallivermetastasesapopulationbasedstudy AT vandentolpetrousjka practicevariationandoutcomesofminimallyinvasiveminorliverresectionsinpatientswithcolorectallivermetastasesapopulationbasedstudy AT oosterlingstevenj practicevariationandoutcomesofminimallyinvasiveminorliverresectionsinpatientswithcolorectallivermetastasesapopulationbasedstudy AT dendulkmarcel practicevariationandoutcomesofminimallyinvasiveminorliverresectionsinpatientswithcolorectallivermetastasesapopulationbasedstudy AT grunhagendirkj practicevariationandoutcomesofminimallyinvasiveminorliverresectionsinpatientswithcolorectallivermetastasesapopulationbasedstudy AT koknielsfm practicevariationandoutcomesofminimallyinvasiveminorliverresectionsinpatientswithcolorectallivermetastasesapopulationbasedstudy AT practicevariationandoutcomesofminimallyinvasiveminorliverresectionsinpatientswithcolorectallivermetastasesapopulationbasedstudy |