Learning Curves of Minimally Invasive Distal Pancreatectomy in Experienced Pancreatic Centers.
Journal
JAMA surgery
ISSN: 2168-6262
Titre abrégé: JAMA Surg
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101589553
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 09 2023
01 09 2023
Historique:
pmc-release:
28
06
2024
medline:
14
9
2023
pubmed:
28
6
2023
entrez:
28
6
2023
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Understanding the learning curve of a new complex surgical technique helps to reduce potential patient harm. Current series on the learning curve of minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) are mostly small, single-center series, thus providing limited data. To evaluate the length of pooled learning curves of MIDP in experienced centers. This international, multicenter, retrospective cohort study included MIDP procedures performed from January 1, 2006, through June 30, 2019, in 26 European centers from 8 countries that each performed more than 15 distal pancreatectomies annually, with an overall experience exceeding 50 MIDP procedures. Consecutive patients who underwent elective laparoscopic or robotic distal pancreatectomy for all indications were included. Data were analyzed between September 1, 2021, and May 1, 2022. The learning curve for MIDP was estimated by pooling data from all centers. The learning curve was assessed for the primary textbook outcome (TBO), which is a composite measure that reflects optimal outcome, and for surgical mastery. Generalized additive models and a 2-piece linear model with a break point were used to estimate the learning curve length of MIDP. Case mix-expected probabilities were plotted and compared with observed outcomes to assess the association of changing case mix with outcomes. The learning curve also was assessed for the secondary outcomes of operation time, intraoperative blood loss, conversion to open rate, and postoperative pancreatic fistula grade B/C. From a total of 2610 MIDP procedures, the learning curve analysis was conducted on 2041 procedures (mean [SD] patient age, 58 [15.3] years; among 2040 with reported sex, 1249 were female [61.2%] and 791 male [38.8%]). The 2-piece model showed an increase and eventually a break point for TBO at 85 procedures (95% CI, 13-157 procedures), with a plateau TBO rate at 70%. The learning-associated loss of TBO rate was estimated at 3.3%. For conversion, a break point was estimated at 40 procedures (95% CI, 11-68 procedures); for operation time, at 56 procedures (95% CI, 35-77 procedures); and for intraoperative blood loss, at 71 procedures (95% CI, 28-114 procedures). For postoperative pancreatic fistula, no break point could be estimated. In experienced international centers, the learning curve length of MIDP for TBO was considerable with 85 procedures. These findings suggest that although learning curves for conversion, operation time, and intraoperative blood loss are completed earlier, extensive experience may be needed to master the learning curve of MIDP.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37378968
pii: 2806697
doi: 10.1001/jamasurg.2023.2279
pmc: PMC10308297
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
927-933Investigateurs
Coen van Dam
(C)
Daniele Ferraro
(D)
Jeremy French
(J)
Isabella Frigerio
(I)
Cristians A Gonzalez
(CA)
Mohammed Hammoda
(M)
Rugved Kulkarni
(R)
Michele Mazzola
(M)
Niccolò Napoli
(N)
Matteo de Pastena
(M)
Claudio Ricci
(C)
Gianluca Rompianesi
(G)
Mushegh A Sahakyan
(MA)
Robert Sutcliffe
(R)
Tole Tholfson
(T)
Patricia Sanchez-Velazquez
(P)
Ulrich Wellner
(U)
Références
Updates Surg. 2015 Sep;67(3):257-64
pubmed: 25990666
Stat Methods Med Res. 1995 Sep;4(3):187-96
pubmed: 8548102
Lancet. 2007 Oct 20;370(9596):1453-7
pubmed: 18064739
Br J Surg. 2019 Nov;106(12):1657-1665
pubmed: 31454072
JAMA Surg. 2014 Mar;149(3):237-43
pubmed: 24402232
Ann Surg. 2020 Jan;271(1):155-162
pubmed: 31274651
HPB (Oxford). 2015 Jul;17(7):580-6
pubmed: 25906690
Surgery. 2007 Jul;142(1):20-5
pubmed: 17629996
J Am Coll Surg. 2015 Mar;220(3):263-270.e1
pubmed: 25600974
Ann Surg. 2022 Jul 7;:
pubmed: 35797608
Ann Surg. 2016 Nov;264(5):754-762
pubmed: 27741008
Ann Surg. 2009 Aug;250(2):187-96
pubmed: 19638912
Br J Surg. 2021 Mar 12;108(2):188-195
pubmed: 33711145
Surgery. 2015 Jan;157(1):45-55
pubmed: 25482464
Trials. 2016 Jun 01;17(1):266
pubmed: 27245050
Ann Surg. 2019 Jan;269(1):2-9
pubmed: 30080726
Surgery. 2017 Mar;161(3):584-591
pubmed: 28040257
Pancreatology. 2013 Jul-Aug;13(4):443-8
pubmed: 23890145
Ann Surg Open. 2022 Jan 27;3(1):e111
pubmed: 37600094
J Am Coll Surg. 2017 May;224(5):826-832.e1
pubmed: 28126547
Br J Surg. 2019 Nov;106(12):1580-1589
pubmed: 31626341
Medicine (Baltimore). 2018 Nov;97(45):e13000
pubmed: 30407289
Br J Surg. 2017 May;104(6):742-750
pubmed: 28240357
HPB (Oxford). 2017 Mar;19(3):190-204
pubmed: 28215904
Obes Surg. 2020 Feb;30(2):640-656
pubmed: 31664653
Ann Surg. 2016 Sep;264(3):482-91
pubmed: 27433897
Ann Surg. 2020 Jun;271(6):1116-1123
pubmed: 30499800
Br J Surg. 2020 Sep;107(10):1281-1288
pubmed: 32259297
J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2016 Jun;26(6):470-4
pubmed: 27149307
Ann Surg. 2020 Jan;271(1):1-14
pubmed: 31567509
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016 Apr 04;4:CD011391
pubmed: 27043078
Surg Today. 2015 Jan;45(1):50-6
pubmed: 24610347
Lancet. 2009 Sep 26;374(9695):1105-12
pubmed: 19782876
Updates Surg. 2012 Sep;64(3):179-83
pubmed: 22763577