A Multi-institutional International Analysis of Textbook Outcomes Among Patients Undergoing Curative-Intent Resection of Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma.
Adolescent
Adult
Age Distribution
Aged
Aged, 80 and over
Asia
/ epidemiology
Austria
/ epidemiology
Bile Duct Neoplasms
/ mortality
Bile Ducts, Intrahepatic
/ surgery
Cholangiocarcinoma
/ mortality
Europe
/ epidemiology
Female
Follow-Up Studies
Hepatectomy
Humans
Male
Middle Aged
North America
/ epidemiology
Retrospective Studies
Sex Distribution
Survival Rate
/ trends
Young Adult
Journal
JAMA surgery
ISSN: 2168-6262
Titre abrégé: JAMA Surg
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101589553
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 06 2019
01 06 2019
Historique:
pubmed:
25
4
2019
medline:
23
2
2020
entrez:
25
4
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Composite measures may be superior to individual measures for the analysis of hospital performance and quality of surgical care. To determine the incidence of a so-called textbook outcome, a composite measure of the quality of surgical care, among patients undergoing curative-intent resection of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma. This cohort study involved an analysis of a multinational, multi-institutional cohort of patient from 15 major hepatobiliary centers in North America, Europe, Australia, and Asia who underwent curative-intent resection of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma between 1993 and 2015. Data analysis was conducted from April 2018 to May 2018. Hospital variation in the composite end point of textbook outcome, defined as negative margins, no perioperative transfusion, no postoperative surgical complications, no prolonged length of stay, no 30-day readmissions, and no 30-day mortality. Secondary end points were factors associated with achieving textbook outcomes. Among 687 patients (of whom 370 [53.9%] were men; median patient age, 61 [range, 18-86] years) undergoing curative-intent resection of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma, a textbook outcome was achieved in 175 patients (25.5%). Being 60 years or younger (odds ratio [OR], 1.61 [95% CI, 1.04-2.49]; P = .03), absence of preoperative jaundice (OR, 4.40 [95% CI, 1.28-15.15]; P = .02), no neoadjuvant chemotherapy (OR, 2.57 [95% CI, 1.05-6.29]; P = .04), T1a/T1b-stage disease (OR, 1.58 [95% CI, 1.01-2.49]; P = .049), N0 status (OR, 3.89 [95% CI, 1.77-8.54]; P = .001), and no bile duct resection (OR, 2.46 [95% CI, 1.25-4.84]; P = .009) were independently associated with achieving a textbook outcome after resection. A prolonged length of stay had the greatest negative association with a textbook outcome. A nomogram to assess the probability of textbook outcome was developed and had good accuracy in both the training data set (area under the curve, 0.755) and validation data set (area under the curve, 0.763). In this study, while hepatic resection for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma was performed with less than 5% mortality in specialized centers, a textbook outcome was achieved in only approximately 26% of patients. A textbook outcome may be useful for the reporting of patient-level hospital performance and hospital variation, leading to quality improvement efforts after resection of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31017645
pii: 2731308
doi: 10.1001/jamasurg.2019.0571
pmc: PMC6487899
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Multicenter Study
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e190571Commentaires et corrections
Type : CommentIn
Références
BJU Int. 2011 Sep;108(6):844-50
pubmed: 21884357
Med Decis Making. 2010 Sep-Oct;30(5):544-55
pubmed: 20110514
Health Serv Res. 2012 Oct;47(5):1861-79
pubmed: 22985030
Ann Surg. 2016 Sep;264(3):492-500
pubmed: 27433909
J Gastrointest Surg. 2013 Dec;17(12):2114-22
pubmed: 24072683
J Gastrointest Surg. 2018 Apr;22(4):668-675
pubmed: 29264768
Cancer. 1997 Mar 1;79(5):892-9
pubmed: 9041150
Health Serv Manage Res. 2013 Aug;26(2-3):86-94
pubmed: 25595005
Br J Surg. 2018 Jun;105(7):857-866
pubmed: 29656380
Eval Health Prof. 1985 Sep;8(3):243-65
pubmed: 10301003
Ann Intern Med. 2012 Jul 3;157(1):49-58
pubmed: 22751760
J Am Coll Surg. 2015 Feb;220(2):169-76
pubmed: 25529903
Eur J Surg Oncol. 2013 Feb;39(2):156-63
pubmed: 23102705
J Surg Oncol. 2017 May;115(6):696-703
pubmed: 28194791
Health Aff (Millwood). 2009 Jul-Aug;28(4):1189-98
pubmed: 19597221
BMJ Open. 2018 Mar 1;8(2):e019405
pubmed: 29496668
Ann Surg. 2014 Oct;260(4):668-77; discussion 677-9
pubmed: 25203884
J Surg Oncol. 2018 Apr;117(5):868-878
pubmed: 29448303
Ann Surg. 2017 Nov;266(5):898-904
pubmed: 28746156
Surgery. 2013 Aug;154(2):152-61
pubmed: 23889945
J Am Coll Surg. 2015 Dec;221(6):1031-40.e1-4
pubmed: 26474514
J Am Coll Surg. 2012 Dec;215(6):820-30
pubmed: 22981432
Med Decis Making. 2011 Nov-Dec;31(6):816-27
pubmed: 22067430
Clin Cancer Res. 2008 Jul 15;14(14):4400-7
pubmed: 18628454
Ann Thorac Surg. 2001 Dec;72(6):2155-68
pubmed: 11789828
J Gastrointest Surg. 2012 Sep;16(9):1727-35
pubmed: 22760965
Ann Thorac Surg. 2011 Mar;91(3):944-82
pubmed: 21353044
Br J Surg. 2017 May;104(6):742-750
pubmed: 28240357
J Gastrointest Surg. 2015 May;19(5):887-96
pubmed: 25707813
Med Care. 1993 Jun;31(6):542-51
pubmed: 8502002
Surgery. 2014 Apr;155(4):593-601
pubmed: 24508118
J Gastrointest Surg. 2018 Sep;22(9):1538-1548
pubmed: 29736663
JAMA. 2004 Aug 18;292(7):847-51
pubmed: 15315999
JAMA Surg. 2015 Nov;150(11):1042-9
pubmed: 26244543
J Am Coll Surg. 2008 Jan;206(1):13-6
pubmed: 18155563
JAMA Surg. 2014 Jan;149(1):10-6
pubmed: 24132708