Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Langenbeck's Archives of Surgery 1/2018

01-02-2018 | ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Statistical approach to quality assessment in liver transplantation

Published in: Langenbeck's Archives of Surgery | Issue 1/2018

Login to get access

Abstract

Purpose

This study investigated the utility of retrospective two one-sided cumulative sum (CUSUM) charts combined with multivariable regression analysis in liver transplantation for transplant center benchmarking.

Methods

One thousand seven hundred and forty-nine consecutive adult primary liver transplants (January 1, 1983 to December 31, 2012) were analyzed retrospectively with two one-sided CUSUM chart analysis of 90-day mortality.

Results

Three eras and two subseries in latest era 3 were identified due to graphically delineated relevant shifts in mean 90-day mortality. Delineation of eras 1, 2, and 3 coincided with relevant changes in allocation policies. CUSUM analysis detected a resurgence of higher mean 90-day mortality in era 3 after results had improved continuously over 25 years. In era 3, two subseries were identified with improving mean 90-day mortality rates from 15.4% in subseries 1 to 8.9% in the following subseries 2. The quantitative influence of independent risk factors on 90-day mortality differed markedly between all identified eras and subseries as assessed with multivariable regression analysis deployed on era-specific subcohorts.

Conclusion

The assessed methodology is able to identify meaningful center-specific eras and subseries of liver transplantation with striking alterations of the significance and weight of outcome drivers for post-transplant 90-day mortality over time. This warrants the introduction of prospective risk-adjusted two one-sided CUSUM chart analysis into quality management in liver transplantation in Germany with the goal to obtain alarm signals as early as possible.
Literature
1.
2.
go back to reference Seehofer D, Schöning W, Neuhaus P (2013) Deceased donor liver transplantation [article in German]. Chirurg 84:391–397CrossRefPubMed Seehofer D, Schöning W, Neuhaus P (2013) Deceased donor liver transplantation [article in German]. Chirurg 84:391–397CrossRefPubMed
3.
go back to reference Metz C, Hoppe N (2013) Organ transplantation in Germany: regulation scandals and scandalous regulation. European Journal of Health Law 20:1–4CrossRef Metz C, Hoppe N (2013) Organ transplantation in Germany: regulation scandals and scandalous regulation. European Journal of Health Law 20:1–4CrossRef
4.
go back to reference Axelrod D, Guidinger M, Metzger R, Wiesner R, Webb R, Merion R (2006) Transplant center quality assessment using a continuously updatable, risk-adjusted technique (CUSUM). Am J Transplant 6:313–323CrossRefPubMed Axelrod D, Guidinger M, Metzger R, Wiesner R, Webb R, Merion R (2006) Transplant center quality assessment using a continuously updatable, risk-adjusted technique (CUSUM). Am J Transplant 6:313–323CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference Axelrod DA, Kalbfleisch JD, Sun RJ, Guidinger MK, Biswas P, Levine GN et al (2009) Innovations in the assessment of transplant center performance: implications for quality improvement. Am J Transplant 9:959–969CrossRefPubMed Axelrod DA, Kalbfleisch JD, Sun RJ, Guidinger MK, Biswas P, Levine GN et al (2009) Innovations in the assessment of transplant center performance: implications for quality improvement. Am J Transplant 9:959–969CrossRefPubMed
6.
go back to reference Neuberger J, Madden S, Collett D (2010) Review of methods for measuring and comparing center performance after organ transplantation. Liver Transpl 16:1119–1128CrossRefPubMed Neuberger J, Madden S, Collett D (2010) Review of methods for measuring and comparing center performance after organ transplantation. Liver Transpl 16:1119–1128CrossRefPubMed
7.
go back to reference Montgomery DC (2012) Time-weighted control charts. In: Montgomery DC Statistical quality control: a modern introduction, 7th edn., Wiley, New York, pp 414–431 Montgomery DC (2012) Time-weighted control charts. In: Montgomery DC Statistical quality control: a modern introduction, 7th edn., Wiley, New York, pp 414–431
8.
go back to reference Hosmer DW, Lemeshow S, Sturdivant R (2013) Applied logistic regression, Third edn. John Wiley & Sons, Inc, New Jersey, pp 89–94 Hosmer DW, Lemeshow S, Sturdivant R (2013) Applied logistic regression, Third edn. John Wiley & Sons, Inc, New Jersey, pp 89–94
9.
go back to reference Bundesärztekammer (2000) Richtlinien zur Organtransplantation gemäß § 16 Transplantationsgesetz. DtschArztebl 97: A-396 / B-333 / C-310 Bundesärztekammer (2000) Richtlinien zur Organtransplantation gemäß § 16 Transplantationsgesetz. DtschArztebl 97: A-396 / B-333 / C-310
10.
go back to reference Bundesärztekammer (2006) Richtlinien zur Organtransplantation gemäß § 16 TPG. DtschArztebl 103: A-3282 / B-2858 / C-2738 Bundesärztekammer (2006) Richtlinien zur Organtransplantation gemäß § 16 TPG. DtschArztebl 103: A-3282 / B-2858 / C-2738
11.
go back to reference Sood A, Ghani KR, Ahlawat R, Modi P, Abaza R, Jeong W et al (2014) Application of the statistical process control method for prospective patient safety monitoring during the learning phase: robotic kidney transplantation with regional hypothermia (IDEAL phase 2a-b). Eur Urol S0302-2838:00184–00185 Sood A, Ghani KR, Ahlawat R, Modi P, Abaza R, Jeong W et al (2014) Application of the statistical process control method for prospective patient safety monitoring during the learning phase: robotic kidney transplantation with regional hypothermia (IDEAL phase 2a-b). Eur Urol S0302-2838:00184–00185
12.
go back to reference Li J, Lo A, Hon S, Ng S, Lee J, Leung K (2012) Institutional learning curve of laparoscopic colectomy—a multi-dimensional analysis. Int J Color Dis 27:527–533CrossRef Li J, Lo A, Hon S, Ng S, Lee J, Leung K (2012) Institutional learning curve of laparoscopic colectomy—a multi-dimensional analysis. Int J Color Dis 27:527–533CrossRef
13.
go back to reference Maguire T, Mayne C, Terry T, Tincello D (2013) Analysis of the surgical learning curve using the cumulative sum (CUSUM) method. Neurourol Urodyn 32:964–967CrossRefPubMed Maguire T, Mayne C, Terry T, Tincello D (2013) Analysis of the surgical learning curve using the cumulative sum (CUSUM) method. Neurourol Urodyn 32:964–967CrossRefPubMed
14.
go back to reference Bartlett A, Parry B (2001) Cusum analysis of trends in operative selection and conversion rates for laparoscopic cholecystectomy. ANZ J Surg 71:453–456CrossRefPubMed Bartlett A, Parry B (2001) Cusum analysis of trends in operative selection and conversion rates for laparoscopic cholecystectomy. ANZ J Surg 71:453–456CrossRefPubMed
15.
go back to reference Steiner SH, Cook RJ, Farewell VT, Treasure T (2000) Monitoring surgical performance using risk-adjusted cumulative sum charts. Biostatistics 1:441–452CrossRefPubMed Steiner SH, Cook RJ, Farewell VT, Treasure T (2000) Monitoring surgical performance using risk-adjusted cumulative sum charts. Biostatistics 1:441–452CrossRefPubMed
16.
go back to reference Weismüller TJ, Negm A, Becker T, Barg-Hock H, Klempnauer J, Manns MP, Strassburg CP (2009) The introduction of MELD-based organ allocation impacts 3-month survival after liver transplantation by influencing pretransplant patient characteristics. Transpl Int 22(10):970–978CrossRefPubMed Weismüller TJ, Negm A, Becker T, Barg-Hock H, Klempnauer J, Manns MP, Strassburg CP (2009) The introduction of MELD-based organ allocation impacts 3-month survival after liver transplantation by influencing pretransplant patient characteristics. Transpl Int 22(10):970–978CrossRefPubMed
18.
go back to reference Weismüller TJ, Fikatas P, Schmidt J, Barreiros AP, Otto G, Beckebaum S, Paul A, Scherer MN, Schmidt HH, Schlitt HJ, Neuhaus P, Klempnauer J, Pratschke J, Manns MP, Strassburg CP (2011) Multicentric evaluation of model for end-stage liver disease-based allocation and survival after liver transplantation in Germany—limitations of the ‘sickest first’-concept. Transpl Int 24(1):91–99CrossRefPubMed Weismüller TJ, Fikatas P, Schmidt J, Barreiros AP, Otto G, Beckebaum S, Paul A, Scherer MN, Schmidt HH, Schlitt HJ, Neuhaus P, Klempnauer J, Pratschke J, Manns MP, Strassburg CP (2011) Multicentric evaluation of model for end-stage liver disease-based allocation and survival after liver transplantation in Germany—limitations of the ‘sickest first’-concept. Transpl Int 24(1):91–99CrossRefPubMed
19.
go back to reference Petrowsky H, Rana A, Kaldas FM, Sharma A, Hong JC, Hong JC, Agopian VG et al (2014) Liver transplantation in highest acuity recipients: identifying factors to avoid futility. Ann Surg 259:1186–1194CrossRefPubMed Petrowsky H, Rana A, Kaldas FM, Sharma A, Hong JC, Hong JC, Agopian VG et al (2014) Liver transplantation in highest acuity recipients: identifying factors to avoid futility. Ann Surg 259:1186–1194CrossRefPubMed
20.
go back to reference Schrem H, Focken M, Gunson B, Reichert B, Mirza D, Kreipe HH et al (2016) The new liver allocation score for transplantation is validated and improved transplant survival benefit in Germany but not in the United Kingdom. Liver Transpl 22(6):743–756CrossRefPubMed Schrem H, Focken M, Gunson B, Reichert B, Mirza D, Kreipe HH et al (2016) The new liver allocation score for transplantation is validated and improved transplant survival benefit in Germany but not in the United Kingdom. Liver Transpl 22(6):743–756CrossRefPubMed
21.
go back to reference Reichert B, Kaltenborn A, Goldis A, Schrem H (2013) Prognostic limitations of the Eurotransplant-Donor Risk Index in liver transplantation. J Negat Results Biomed 24:12–18 Reichert B, Kaltenborn A, Goldis A, Schrem H (2013) Prognostic limitations of the Eurotransplant-Donor Risk Index in liver transplantation. J Negat Results Biomed 24:12–18
Metadata
Title
Statistical approach to quality assessment in liver transplantation
Publication date
01-02-2018
Published in
Langenbeck's Archives of Surgery / Issue 1/2018
Print ISSN: 1435-2443
Electronic ISSN: 1435-2451
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00423-017-1612-7

Other articles of this Issue 1/2018

Langenbeck's Archives of Surgery 1/2018 Go to the issue