Original article
Implementation of a regional reference center in pancreatic surgery. Experience after 631 proceduresImplementación de un centro de referencia regional en cirugía pancreática. Experiencia tras 631 procedimientos

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cireng.2021.11.001Get rights and content

Abstract

Introduction

The main objective of this study is to determine whether our unit meets the quality standards required by the scientific community from the reference centers for pancreatic surgery in terms of peri-operative results. The secondary objectives are to compare the different pancreatic surgery techniques performed in terms of early post-operative morbidity and mortality and to analyze the impact of the resections added in these terms.

Method

Descriptive, retrospective and single-center study, corresponding to the period 2006−2019. The results obtained were compared with the proposed quality standards, by Bassi et al. and Sabater et al., required from the reference centers in pancreatic surgery. The sample was divided according to surgical technique and compared in terms of early post-operative morbidity and mortality, studying the impact of extended vascular and visceral resections. All patients undergoing pancreatic surgery in our unit due to pancreatic, malignant and benign pathology were included, since it was implemented as a reference center. Emergency procedures were excluded.

Results

631 patients were analyzed. The values ​​obtained in the quality standards are in range. The most frequent surgery was pancreaticoduodenectomy, which associated higher peri-operative morbidity and mortality rates (P ≤ .05). The extended vascular resections impacted the pancreaticoduodenectomy group, associating a longer mean stay (P = .01) and a higher rate of re-interventions (P = .02).

Conclusions

The experience accumulated allows to meet the required quality standards, as well as perform extended resections to pancreatectomy with good results in terms of post-operative morbidity and mortality.

Resumen

Introducción

El objetivo principal de este estudio es determinar si la Unidad de Cirugía Hepato-Bilio-Pancreática y Trasplante Hepático del Hospital Universitario de Badajoz cumple los estándares de calidad exigidos por la comunidad científica a los centros de referencia de cirugía pancreática (CP) en términos de resultados perioperatorios. Los objetivos secundarios consisten en comparar las diferentes técnicas de CP realizadas en función de la morbimortalidad postoperatoria precoz y analizar el impacto de las resecciones extendidas en dichos términos.

Método

Estudio descriptivo, retrospectivo y unicéntrico, correspondiente al periodo 2006−2019. Se compararon los resultados obtenidos con los estándares de calidad propuestos por Bassi et al. y Sabater et al., exigidos a los centros de referencia en cirugía pancreática. La muestra se dividió según técnica quirúrgica y se compararon en términos de morbimortalidad postoperatoria precoz, estudiando el impacto de las resecciones vasculares y viscerales extendidas. Se incluyeron todos los pacientes sometidos a cirugía pancreática en nuestra unidad por patología pancreática, maligna y benigna, desde que ésta se implementó como centro de referencia. Se excluyeron las realizadas de urgencia.

Resultados

Se analizaron 631 pacientes. Los valores obtenidos en los estándares de calidad se encuentran en rango. La cirugía más frecuente fue duodenopancreatectomía cefálica, la cual asoció mayor tasa de morbimortalidad perioperatoria (P ≤ ,05). Las resecciones vasculares añadidas impactaron en el grupo de duodenopancreatectomía cefálica asociando mayor estancia media (P = ,01) y mayor tasa de reinteEVRnción (P = ,02).

Conclusiones

La experiencia acumulada permite cumplir con los estándares de calidad exigidos, así como realizar resecciones extendidas a la pancreatectomía con buenos resultados en términos de morbimortalidad postoperatoria.

Introduction

Although postoperative mortality is currently around 5% in high-volume pancreatic surgery (PS) centers1, 2, morbidity continues to be high, reaching rates up to 60%3, 4. Regardless of the general surgical complications associated with any procedure, PS presents specific complications: delayed gastric emptying (DGE), pancreatic fistula (PF) and post-pancreatectomy hemorrhage (PPH), with associated incidences of 19%–7%5, 2%–20%6 and 1%–8%7, respectively.

Sabater et al.8 established the required quality standards for oncological PS, proposing rates of resectability >58%, morbidity <73% and mortality <10%, with associated rates of biliary fistula (BF) <14%, PF< 29%, PPH< 21% and reoperation <20%, with a mean stay <21 days.

The three most common types of PS are pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD), distal pancreatectomy (DP), and total pancreatectomy (TP). The postoperative morbidity rate associated with PD is 50%–60%, with a mortality rate of 5%9; TP associates a morbidity of 59.3% and mortality 2.1%10; DP is the group with the lowest morbidity and mortality rates, at 18% and 0.6%11, respectively.

The main objective of this study is to determine whether the Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic Surgery and Liver Transplantation Unit of the Hospital Universitario de Badajoz meets the quality standards required by the medical community for PS reference centers in terms of perioperative results. The secondary objectives are to compare the different PS techniques performed in terms of early postoperative morbidity and mortality rates and to analyze the impact of extended resections in these terms.

Section snippets

Methods

We have conducted a descriptive, retrospective, single-center study from 2006 to 2019. The study included all patients who underwent surgery for pancreatic pathology, either malignant or benign, by our unit, which is a regional pancreatic surgery referral center. Emergency surgery was excluded.

Results

In the study period, 631 PS were performed, with an associated resectability rate of 80.2%. The most frequent PS was PD, followed by DP and TP (Table 1).

The three groups are homogeneous in terms of epidemiological and preoperative variables, except for patient sex (P = .007) and the rates of PBD (P = .03) and neoadjuvant therapy (P = .001), both of which were higher in the PD group (Table 1). Surgical salvage rates after neoadjuvant treatment were 100% in the DP group and 42.2% in the PD group (

Discussion

In 1999, Birkmeyer et al. reported post-PD mortality rates with the volumes of surgery at hospital centers, suggesting that the centralization of pancreatic surgery could impact patient survival31. Two years later, in 2001, the Institute of Medicine (IM) defined the concept of quality in the medical field, which is comprised of six elements: safety, effectiveness, timeliness, efficiency, centralization and equity32. Subsequently, in 2004, the Leapfrog group, with the aim to improve quality,

Conflict of interests

The authors have no conflict of interests to declare.

References (67)

  • S. Dokmak et al.

    Pancreatectomías izquierdas

    EMC - Técnicas Quirúrgicas - Aparato Digestivo.

    (2012)
  • A. Sauvanet

    Duodenopancreatectomía total y totalización de una pancreatectomía

    EMC - Técnicas Quirúrgicas - Aparato Digestivo.

    (2012)
  • A. Sauvanet

    Pancreatectomías cefálicas e ístmicas con conservación duodenal

    EMC - Técnicas Quirúrgicas - Aparato Digestivo.

    (2012)
  • M. Sugimoto et al.

    In patients with a soft pancreas, a thick parenchyma, a small duct, and fatty infiltration are significant risks for pancreatic fistula after pancreaticoduodenectomy

    J Gastrointest Surg.

    (2017)
  • C. Bassi et al.

    The 2016 update of the International Study Group (ISGPS ) definition and grading of postoperative pancreatic fistula: 11 years after

    Surgery.

    (2017)
  • J.D. Birkmeyer et al.

    Effect of hospital volume on in-hospital mortality with pancreaticoduodenectomy

    Surgery.

    (1999)
  • B.T. Kalish et al.

    Quality assessment in pancreatic surgery: what might tomorrow require?

    J Gastrointest Surg.

    (2013)
  • H. Nathan et al.

    The volume-outcomes effect in hepato-pancreato-biliary surgery: hospital versus surgeon contributions and specificity of the relationship

    J Am Coll Surg.

    (2009)
  • N. Pecorelli et al.

    Effect of surgeon volume on outcome following pancreaticoduodenectomy in a high-volume hospital

    J Gastrointest Surg.

    (2012)
  • M.M. Al-Hawary et al.

    Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma radiology reporting template: consensus statement of the society of abdominal radiology and the American Pancreatic Association

    Gastroenterology.

    (2014)
  • C. Bassi et al.

    Identifying key outcome metrics in pancreatic surgery, and how to optimally achieve them

    HPB (Oxford).

    (2017)
  • D.S.J. Tseng et al.

    Diagnostic accuracy of CT in assessing extra-regional lymphadenopathy in pancreatic and peri-ampullary cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

    Surg Oncol.

    (2014)
  • P.J. Lee et al.

    Preoperative biliary drainage in resectable pancreatic cancer : a systematic review and network meta-analysis

    HPB (Oxford).

    (2018)
  • X. Wang et al.

    Venous resection during pancreatectomy for pancreatic cancer: a systematic review

    Transl Gastroenterol Hepatol.

    (2019)
  • N. Petrucciani et al.

    Pancreatectomy combined with multivisceral resection for pancreatic malignancies: is it justified? Results of a systematic review

    HPB (Oxford).

    (2018)
  • T. Malinka et al.

    Distal pancreatectomy combined with multivisceral resection is associated with postoperative complication rates and survival comparable to those after standard procedures

    J Gastrointest Surg.

    (2018)
  • B.L. Gough et al.

    Complex distal pancreatectomy outcomes performed at a single institution

    Surg Oncol.

    (2018)
  • M.W. Buchler et al.

    Changes in morbidity after pancreatic resection: toward the end of completion pancreatectomy

    Arch Surg.

    (2003)
  • A. Kleespies et al.

    The challenge of pancreatic anastomosis

    Langenbecks Arch Surg.

    (2008)
  • F. Ruckert et al.

    Evaluation of POSSUM for patients undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy

    J Invest Surg.

    (2014)
  • K. Giuliano et al.

    Technical aspects of pancreaticoduodenectomy and their outcomes

    Chin Clin Oncol.

    (2017)
  • A. Pulvirenti et al.

    Perioperative outcomes and long-term quality of life after total pancreatectomy

    Br J Surg.

    (2019)
  • G.R. Varadhachary et al.

    Borderline resectable pancreatic cáncer: definitions, managemente, and role of preoperartive therapy

    Ann Surg Oncol.

    (2006)
  • Cited by (0)

    Please cite this article as: Castillo Tuñón JM, Valle Rodas ME, Botello Martínez F, Rojas Holguín A, López Guerra D, Santos Naharro J, et al. Implementación de un centro de referencia regional en cirugía pancreática. Experiencia tras 631 procedimientos. Cir Esp. 2021;99:745–756.

    View full text