Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2021 Aug 1;156(8):e212064.
doi: 10.1001/jamasurg.2021.2064. Epub 2021 Aug 11.

Assessment of Textbook Outcome in Laparoscopic and Open Liver Surgery

Affiliations

Assessment of Textbook Outcome in Laparoscopic and Open Liver Surgery

Burak Görgec et al. JAMA Surg. .

Abstract

Importance: Textbook outcome (TO) is a composite measure that captures the most desirable surgical outcomes as a single indicator, yet to date TO has not been defined and assessed in the field of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) and open liver resection (OLR).

Objective: To obtain international agreement on the definition of TO in liver surgery (TOLS) and to assess the incidence of TO in LLR and OLR in a large international multicenter database using a propensity-score matched analysis.

Design, setting, and participants: Patients undergoing LLR or OLR for all liver diseases between January 2011 and October 2019 were analyzed using a large international multicenter liver surgical database. An international survey was conducted among all members of the European-African Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association (E-AHPBA) and International Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association (IHPBA) to reach agreement on the definition of TOLS. The rate of TOLS was assessed for LLR and OLR before and after propensity-score matching. Factors associated with achieving TOLS were investigated.

Main outcomes and measures: Textbook outcome, with TOLS defined as the absence of intraoperative incidents of grade 2 or higher, postoperative bile leak grade B or C, severe postoperative complications, readmission within 30 days after discharge, in-hospital mortality, and the presence of R0 resection margin.

Results: A total of 8188 patients (4559 LLR; median age, 65 years [interquartile range, 55-73 years]; 2529 were male [55.8%] and 3629 OLR; median age, 64 years [interquartile range, 56-71 years]; 2204 were male [60.7%]) were included in the analysis of whom 69.1% achieved TOLS; 74.8% for LLR and 61.9% for OLR (P < .001). On multivariable analysis, American Society of Anesthesiologists grade III, previous abdominal surgery, histological diagnosis of colorectal liver metastases (odds ratio [OR], 0.656 [95% CI, 0.457-0.940]; P = .02), cholangiocarcinoma, non-CRLM, a tumor size of 30 mm or more, minor resection of posterior/superior segments (OR, 0.716 [95% CI, 0.577-0.887]; P = .002), anatomically major resection (OR, 0.579 [95% CI, 0.418-0.803]; P = .001), and nonanatomical resection (OR, 0.612 [95% CI, 0.476-0.788]; P < .001) were associated with a worse TOLS rate after LLR. For OLR, only histological diagnosis of cholangiocarcinoma (OR, 0.360 [95% CI, 0.214-0.607]; P < .001) and a tumor size of 30 mm or more (30-50 mm = OR, 0.718 [95% CI, 0.565-0.911]; P = .01; 50.1-100 mm = OR, 0.729 [95% CI, 0.554-0.960]; P = .02; >10 cm = OR, 0.550 [95% CI, 0.366-0.826]; P = .004) were associated with a worse TOLS rate.

Conclusions and relevance: In this multicenter study, TOLS was found to be a useful tool for assessing patient-level hospital performance and may have utility in optimizing patient outcomes after LLR and OLR.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of Interest Disclosures: Dr Rotellar reported personal fees from Sirtex Medical Lectures, personal fees from Olympus Lectures, personal fees from Baxter Lectures, personal fees from Integra Lectures, and personal fees from Medtronic Lectures outside the submitted work. No other disclosures were reported.

Figures

Figure.
Figure.. Textbook Outcome Distribution by Its Definition After Propensity-Score Matching

Comment in

References

    1. Ciria R, Gomez-Luque I, Ocaña S, et al. . A systematic review and meta-analysis comparing the short- and long-term outcomes for laparoscopic and open liver resections for hepatocellular carcinoma: updated results from the European Guidelines Meeting on Laparoscopic Liver Surgery, Southampton, UK, 2017. Ann Surg Oncol. 2019;26(1):252-263. doi:10.1245/s10434-018-6926-3 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Nguyen KT, Gamblin TC, Geller DA. World review of laparoscopic liver resection-2,804 patients. Ann Surg. 2009;250(5):831-841. doi:10.1097/SLA.0b013e3181b0c4df - DOI - PubMed
    1. Cipriani F, Rawashdeh M, Stanton L, et al. . Propensity score-based analysis of outcomes of laparoscopic versus open liver resection for colorectal metastases. Br J Surg. 2016;103(11):1504-1512. doi:10.1002/bjs.10211 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Halls MC, Alseidi A, Berardi G, et al. . A comparison of the learning curves of laparoscopic liver surgeons in differing stages of the IDEAL paradigm of surgical innovation: standing on the shoulders of pioneers. Ann Surg. 2019;269(2):221-228. doi:10.1097/SLA.0000000000002996 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Kolfschoten NE, Kievit J, Gooiker GA, et al. . Focusing on desired outcomes of care after colon cancer resections; hospital variations in ‘textbook outcome’. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2013;39(2):156-163. doi:10.1016/j.ejso.2012.10.007 - DOI - PubMed

MeSH terms