Skip to main content
Top
Published in: BMC Surgery 1/2022

Open Access 01-12-2022 | Pancreatectomy | Research

Establishing an open and robotic pancreatic surgery program in a level 1 trauma center community teaching hospital and comparing its outcomes to high-volume academic center outcomes: a retrospective review

Authors: Jane S. Han, C. Michael Dunham, Charles E. Renner, Steven A. Neubauer, F. Nikki McCarron, Thomas J. Chirichella

Published in: BMC Surgery | Issue 1/2022

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

The debate of whether to centralize hepato-pancreato-biliary surgery has been ongoing. The principal objective was to compare outcomes of a community pancreatic surgical program with those of high-volume academic centers.

Methods

The current pancreatic surgical study occurred in an environment where (1) a certified abdominal transplant surgeon performed all surgeries; (2) complementary quality enhancement programs had been developed; (3) the hospital’s trauma center had been verified; and (4) the hospital’s surgical training had been accredited. Pancreatic surgical outcomes at high-volume academic centers were obtained through PubMed literature searches. Articles were selected if they described diverse surgical procedures. Two-tailed Fisher exact and mid-P tests were used to perform 2 × 2 contingency analyses.

Results

The study patients consisted of 64 consecutive pancreatic surgical patients. The study patients had a similar pancreaticoduodenectomy proportion (59.4%) when compared to literature patients (66.8%; P = 0.227). The study patients also had a similar distal pancreatectomy proportion (25.0%) when compared to literature patients (31.9%; P = 0.276). The study patients had a significantly higher American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status ≥ 3 proportion (100%) than literature patients (28.1%; P < 0.001). The 90-day study mortality proportion (0%) was similar to the literature proportion (2.3%; P = 0.397). The study postoperative pancreatic fistula proportion was lower (3.2%), when compared to the literature proportion (18.4%; P < 0.001; risk ratio = 5.8). The study patients had a lower reoperation proportion (3.1%) than the literature proportion (8.7%; mid-P = 0.051; risk ratio = 2.8). The study patients had a lower surgical site infection proportion (3.1%) than those in the literature (21.1%; P < 0.001; risk ratio = 6.8). The study patients had equivalent delayed gastric emptying (15.6%) when compared to literature patients (10.6%; P = 0.216). The study patients had decreased Clavien–Dindo grades III–IV complications (10.9%) compared to the literature patients (21.8%; mid-P = 0.018). Lastly, the study patients had a similar readmission proportion (20.3%) compared to literature patients (18.4%; P = 0.732).

Conclusion

Despite pancreatic surgical patients having greater preoperative medical comorbidities, the current community study outcomes were comparable to or better than high-volume academic center results.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference Sánchez-Velázquez P, Muller X, Malleo G, Park JS, Hwang HK, Napoli N, et al. Benchmarks in pancreatic surgery: a novel tool for unbiased outcome comparisons. Ann Surg. 2019;270:211–8.CrossRef Sánchez-Velázquez P, Muller X, Malleo G, Park JS, Hwang HK, Napoli N, et al. Benchmarks in pancreatic surgery: a novel tool for unbiased outcome comparisons. Ann Surg. 2019;270:211–8.CrossRef
2.
go back to reference Schmidt CM, Turrini O, Parikh P, House MG, Zyromski NJ, Nakeeb A, et al. Effect of hospital volume, surgeon experience, and surgeon volume on patient outcomes after pancreaticoduodenectomy: a single-institution experience. Arch Surg. 2010;145:634–40.CrossRef Schmidt CM, Turrini O, Parikh P, House MG, Zyromski NJ, Nakeeb A, et al. Effect of hospital volume, surgeon experience, and surgeon volume on patient outcomes after pancreaticoduodenectomy: a single-institution experience. Arch Surg. 2010;145:634–40.CrossRef
3.
go back to reference Melloul E, Lassen K, Roulin D, Grass F, Perinel J, Adham M, et al. Guidelines for perioperative care for pancreatoduodenectomy: enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) recommendations 2019. World J Surg. 2020;44:2056–84.CrossRef Melloul E, Lassen K, Roulin D, Grass F, Perinel J, Adham M, et al. Guidelines for perioperative care for pancreatoduodenectomy: enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) recommendations 2019. World J Surg. 2020;44:2056–84.CrossRef
4.
go back to reference Hermanek P, Wittekind C. Residual tumor (R) classification and prognosis. Semin Surg Oncol. 1994;10:12–20.CrossRef Hermanek P, Wittekind C. Residual tumor (R) classification and prognosis. Semin Surg Oncol. 1994;10:12–20.CrossRef
5.
go back to reference Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien PA. Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg. 2004;240:205–13.CrossRef Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien PA. Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg. 2004;240:205–13.CrossRef
6.
go back to reference Bassi C, Marchegiani G, Dervenis C, Sarr M, Abu Hilal M, Adham M, et al. The 2016 update of the International Study Group (ISGPS) definition and grading of postoperative pancreatic fistula: 11 Years After. Surgery. 2017;161:584–91.CrossRef Bassi C, Marchegiani G, Dervenis C, Sarr M, Abu Hilal M, Adham M, et al. The 2016 update of the International Study Group (ISGPS) definition and grading of postoperative pancreatic fistula: 11 Years After. Surgery. 2017;161:584–91.CrossRef
7.
go back to reference Sullivan KM, Dean A, Soe MM. OpenEpi: a web-based epidemiologic and statistical calculator for public health. Public Health Rep. 2009;124:471–4.CrossRef Sullivan KM, Dean A, Soe MM. OpenEpi: a web-based epidemiologic and statistical calculator for public health. Public Health Rep. 2009;124:471–4.CrossRef
8.
go back to reference Lydersen S, Fagerland MW, Laake P. Recommended tests for association in 2 x 2 tables. Stat Med. 2009;28:1159–75.CrossRef Lydersen S, Fagerland MW, Laake P. Recommended tests for association in 2 x 2 tables. Stat Med. 2009;28:1159–75.CrossRef
9.
go back to reference Rubin-Delanchy P, Heard NA, Lawson DJ. Meta-analysis of mid-p-values: some new results based on the convex order. J Am Stat Assoc. 2019;114:1105–12.CrossRef Rubin-Delanchy P, Heard NA, Lawson DJ. Meta-analysis of mid-p-values: some new results based on the convex order. J Am Stat Assoc. 2019;114:1105–12.CrossRef
10.
go back to reference Gabel SA, Morrison ZD, Sharma R, Wernberg JA. Resident participation as co-surgeon does not adversely impact patient outcomes in pancreatic surgery. J Surg Educ. 2020;77:1528–33.CrossRef Gabel SA, Morrison ZD, Sharma R, Wernberg JA. Resident participation as co-surgeon does not adversely impact patient outcomes in pancreatic surgery. J Surg Educ. 2020;77:1528–33.CrossRef
11.
go back to reference Hanna-Sawires RG, Groen JV, Klok FA, Tollenaar R, Mesker WE, Swijnenburg RJ, et al. Outcomes following pancreatic surgery using three different thromboprophylaxis regimens. Br J Surg. 2019;106:765–73.CrossRef Hanna-Sawires RG, Groen JV, Klok FA, Tollenaar R, Mesker WE, Swijnenburg RJ, et al. Outcomes following pancreatic surgery using three different thromboprophylaxis regimens. Br J Surg. 2019;106:765–73.CrossRef
12.
go back to reference Hardacre JM, Raigani S, Dumot J. Starting a high-quality pancreatic surgery program at a community hospital. J Gastrointest Surg. 2015;19:2178–82.CrossRef Hardacre JM, Raigani S, Dumot J. Starting a high-quality pancreatic surgery program at a community hospital. J Gastrointest Surg. 2015;19:2178–82.CrossRef
13.
go back to reference Krautz C, Haase E, Elshafei M, Saeger HD, Distler M, Grützmann R, et al. The impact of surgical experience and frequency of practice on perioperative outcomes in pancreatic surgery. BMC Surg. 2019;19:108.CrossRef Krautz C, Haase E, Elshafei M, Saeger HD, Distler M, Grützmann R, et al. The impact of surgical experience and frequency of practice on perioperative outcomes in pancreatic surgery. BMC Surg. 2019;19:108.CrossRef
14.
go back to reference Nicholas E, van Roessel S, de Burlet K, Hore T, Besselink MG, Connor S. Using Textbook Outcomes to benchmark practice in pancreatic surgery. ANZ J Surg. 2021;91:361–6.CrossRef Nicholas E, van Roessel S, de Burlet K, Hore T, Besselink MG, Connor S. Using Textbook Outcomes to benchmark practice in pancreatic surgery. ANZ J Surg. 2021;91:361–6.CrossRef
15.
go back to reference Salvia R, Andrianello S, Ciprani D, Deiro G, Malleo G, Paiella S, et al. Pancreatic surgery is a safe teaching model for tutoring residents in the setting of a high-volume academic hospital: a retrospective analysis of surgical and pathological outcomes. HPB (Oxford). 2021;23:520–7.CrossRef Salvia R, Andrianello S, Ciprani D, Deiro G, Malleo G, Paiella S, et al. Pancreatic surgery is a safe teaching model for tutoring residents in the setting of a high-volume academic hospital: a retrospective analysis of surgical and pathological outcomes. HPB (Oxford). 2021;23:520–7.CrossRef
16.
go back to reference Schlottmann F, Iovaldi ML, Capitanich P, McCormack L. Outcomes of pancreatic surgery in patients older than 70 years. Cir Esp. 2015;93:638–42.CrossRef Schlottmann F, Iovaldi ML, Capitanich P, McCormack L. Outcomes of pancreatic surgery in patients older than 70 years. Cir Esp. 2015;93:638–42.CrossRef
17.
go back to reference Khreiss M, Zenati M, Clifford A, Lee KK, Hogg ME, Slivka A, et al. Cyst gastrostomy and necrosectomy for the management of sterile walled-off pancreatic necrosis: a comparison of minimally invasive surgical and endoscopic outcomes at a high-volume pancreatic center. J Gastrointest Surg. 2015;19:1441–8.CrossRef Khreiss M, Zenati M, Clifford A, Lee KK, Hogg ME, Slivka A, et al. Cyst gastrostomy and necrosectomy for the management of sterile walled-off pancreatic necrosis: a comparison of minimally invasive surgical and endoscopic outcomes at a high-volume pancreatic center. J Gastrointest Surg. 2015;19:1441–8.CrossRef
18.
go back to reference Luckhurst CM, El Hechi M, Elsharkawy AE, Eid AI, Maurer LR, Kaafarani HM, et al. Improved mortality in necrotizing pancreatitis with a multidisciplinary minimally invasive step-up approach: comparison with a modern open necrosectomy cohort. J Am Coll Surg. 2020;230:873–83.CrossRef Luckhurst CM, El Hechi M, Elsharkawy AE, Eid AI, Maurer LR, Kaafarani HM, et al. Improved mortality in necrotizing pancreatitis with a multidisciplinary minimally invasive step-up approach: comparison with a modern open necrosectomy cohort. J Am Coll Surg. 2020;230:873–83.CrossRef
19.
go back to reference Sabesan A, Gough BL, Anderson C, Abdel-Misih R, Petrelli NJ, Bennett JJ. High volume pancreaticoduodenectomy performed at an academic community cancer center. Am J Surg. 2019;218:349–54.CrossRef Sabesan A, Gough BL, Anderson C, Abdel-Misih R, Petrelli NJ, Bennett JJ. High volume pancreaticoduodenectomy performed at an academic community cancer center. Am J Surg. 2019;218:349–54.CrossRef
20.
go back to reference Lidsky ME, Sun Z, Nussbaum DP, Adam MA, Speicher PJ, Blazer DG 3rd. Going the extra mile: improved survival for pancreatic cancer patients traveling to high-volume centers. Ann Surg. 2017;266:333–8.CrossRef Lidsky ME, Sun Z, Nussbaum DP, Adam MA, Speicher PJ, Blazer DG 3rd. Going the extra mile: improved survival for pancreatic cancer patients traveling to high-volume centers. Ann Surg. 2017;266:333–8.CrossRef
21.
go back to reference Ahola R, Sand J, Laukkarinen J. Pancreatic resections are not only safest but also most cost-effective when performed in a high-volume centre: a Finnish register study. Pancreatology. 2019;19:769–74.CrossRef Ahola R, Sand J, Laukkarinen J. Pancreatic resections are not only safest but also most cost-effective when performed in a high-volume centre: a Finnish register study. Pancreatology. 2019;19:769–74.CrossRef
22.
go back to reference Cameron JL, He J. Two thousand consecutive pancreaticoduodenectomies. J Am Coll Surg. 2015;220:530–6.CrossRef Cameron JL, He J. Two thousand consecutive pancreaticoduodenectomies. J Am Coll Surg. 2015;220:530–6.CrossRef
23.
go back to reference Toomey PG, Teta AF, Patel KD, Ross SB, Rosemurgy AS. High-volume surgeons vs high-volume hospitals: are best outcomes more due to who or where? Am J Surg. 2016;211:59–63.CrossRef Toomey PG, Teta AF, Patel KD, Ross SB, Rosemurgy AS. High-volume surgeons vs high-volume hospitals: are best outcomes more due to who or where? Am J Surg. 2016;211:59–63.CrossRef
24.
go back to reference Narayanan S, Martin AN, Turrentine FE, Bauer TW, Adams RB, Zaydfudim VM. Mortality after pancreaticoduodenectomy: assessing early and late causes of patient death. J Surg Res. 2018;231:304–8.CrossRef Narayanan S, Martin AN, Turrentine FE, Bauer TW, Adams RB, Zaydfudim VM. Mortality after pancreaticoduodenectomy: assessing early and late causes of patient death. J Surg Res. 2018;231:304–8.CrossRef
25.
go back to reference Ball CG, Pitt HA, Kilbane ME, Dixon E, Sutherland FR, Lillemoe KD. Peri-operative blood transfusion and operative time are quality indicators for pancreatoduodenectomy. HPB (Oxford). 2010;12:465–71.CrossRef Ball CG, Pitt HA, Kilbane ME, Dixon E, Sutherland FR, Lillemoe KD. Peri-operative blood transfusion and operative time are quality indicators for pancreatoduodenectomy. HPB (Oxford). 2010;12:465–71.CrossRef
26.
go back to reference Shakir M, Boone BA, Polanco PM, Zenati MS, Hogg ME, Tsung A, et al. The learning curve for robotic distal pancreatectomy: an analysis of outcomes of the first 100 consecutive cases at a high-volume pancreatic centre. HPB (Oxford). 2015;17:580–6.CrossRef Shakir M, Boone BA, Polanco PM, Zenati MS, Hogg ME, Tsung A, et al. The learning curve for robotic distal pancreatectomy: an analysis of outcomes of the first 100 consecutive cases at a high-volume pancreatic centre. HPB (Oxford). 2015;17:580–6.CrossRef
27.
go back to reference Lyman WB, Passeri M, Sastry A, Cochran A, Iannitti DA, Vrochides D, et al. Robotic-assisted versus laparoscopic left pancreatectomy at a high-volume, minimally invasive center. Surg Endosc. 2019;33:2991–3000.CrossRef Lyman WB, Passeri M, Sastry A, Cochran A, Iannitti DA, Vrochides D, et al. Robotic-assisted versus laparoscopic left pancreatectomy at a high-volume, minimally invasive center. Surg Endosc. 2019;33:2991–3000.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Establishing an open and robotic pancreatic surgery program in a level 1 trauma center community teaching hospital and comparing its outcomes to high-volume academic center outcomes: a retrospective review
Authors
Jane S. Han
C. Michael Dunham
Charles E. Renner
Steven A. Neubauer
F. Nikki McCarron
Thomas J. Chirichella
Publication date
01-12-2022
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Surgery / Issue 1/2022
Electronic ISSN: 1471-2482
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12893-022-01867-7

Other articles of this Issue 1/2022

BMC Surgery 1/2022 Go to the issue