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
Multicenter Study
. 2023 Jul 1;278(1):103-109.
doi: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000005539. Epub 2022 Jun 28.

Defining Benchmark Outcomes for Distal Pancreatectomy: Results of a French Multicentric Study

Affiliations
Free article
Multicenter Study

Defining Benchmark Outcomes for Distal Pancreatectomy: Results of a French Multicentric Study

Thibault Durin et al. Ann Surg. .
Free article

Abstract

Objective: Defining robust and standardized outcome references for distal pancreatectomy (DP) by using Benchmark analysis.

Background: Outcomes after DP are recorded in medium or small-sized studies without standardized analysis. Therefore, the best results remain uncertain.

Methods: This multicenter study included all patients undergoing DP for resectable benign or malignant tumors in 21 French expert centers in pancreas surgery from 2014 to 2018. A low-risk cohort defined by no significant comorbidities was analyzed to establish 18 outcome benchmarks for DP. These values were tested in high risk, minimally invasive and benign tumor cohorts.

Results: A total of 1188 patients were identified and 749 low-risk patients were screened to establish Benchmark cut-offs. Therefore, Benchmark rate for mini-invasive approach was ≥36.8%. Benchmark cut-offs for postoperative mortality, major morbidity grade ≥3a and clinically significant pancreatic fistula rates were 0%, ≤27%, and ≤28%, respectively. The benchmark rate for readmission was ≤16%. For patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma, cut-offs were ≥75%, ≥69.5%, and ≥66% for free resection margins (R0), 1-year disease-free survival and 3-year overall survival, respectively. The rate of mini-invasive approach in high-risk cohort was lower than the Benchmark cut-off (34.1% vs ≥36.8%). All Benchmark cut-offs were respected for benign tumor group. The proportion of benchmark cases was correlated to outcomes of DP. Centers with a majority of low-risk patients had worse results than those operating complex cases.

Conclusion: This large-scale study is the first benchmark analysis of DP outcomes and provides robust and standardized data. This may allow for comparisons between surgeons, centers, studies, and surgical techniques.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors report no conflicts of interest.

References

    1. Pratt W, Maithel S, Vanounou T, et al. Postoperative pancreatic fistulas are not equivalent after proximal, distal, and central pancreatectomy. J Gastrointest Surg. 2006;10:1264–1278.
    1. Gough BL, Levi S, Sabesan A, et al. Complex distal pancreatectomy outcomes performed at a single institution. Surg Oncol. 2018;27:428–432.
    1. Roussel E, Clément G, Lenne X, et al. Is centralization needed for patients undergoing distal pancreatectomy? Pancreas. 2019;48:1188–1194.
    1. Mehrabi A, Hafezi M, Arvin J, et al. A systematic review and meta-analysis of laparoscopic versus open distal pancreatectomy for benign and malignant lesions of the pancreas: it’s time to randomize. Surgery. 2015;157:45–55.
    1. Chen K, Pan Y, Huang Cj, et al. Laparoscopic versus open pancreatic resection for ductal adenocarcinoma: separate propensity score matching analyses of distal pancreatectomy and pancreaticoduodenectomy. BMC Cancer. 2021;21:382.

Publication types