Defining Global Benchmarks for Laparoscopic Right Posterior Sectionectomy/H67: An International Multicenter Study
- PMID: 38939972
- DOI: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000006418
Defining Global Benchmarks for Laparoscopic Right Posterior Sectionectomy/H67: An International Multicenter Study
Abstract
Objective: To establish global benchmark outcomes indicators for laparoscopic right posterior sectionectomies (L-RPSs)/H67.
Background: Minimally invasive liver resections have seen an increase in uptake in recent years. Over time, challenging procedures such as L-RPS/H67 are also increasingly adopted.
Methods: This is a post hoc analysis of a multicenter database of 854 patients undergoing minimally invasive RPS in 57 international centers in 4 continents between 2015 and 2021. There were 651 pure L-RPS and 160 robotic RPS. Sixteen outcome indicators of low-risk L-RPS cases were selected to establish benchmark cutoffs. The 75th percentile of individual center medians for a given outcome indicator was set as the benchmark cutoff.
Results: There were 573 L-RPS/H67 performed in 43 expert centers, of which 254 L-RPS/H67 (44.3%) cases qualified as low-risk benchmark cases. The benchmark outcomes established for operation time, open conversion rate, blood loss ≥500 mL, blood transfusion rate, postoperative morbidity, major morbidity, 90-day mortality, and textbook outcome after L-RPS were 350.8 minutes, 12.5%, 53.8%, 22.9%, 23.8%, 2.8%, 0%, and 4%, respectively.
Conclusions: The present study established the first global benchmark values for L-RPS/H6/7. The benchmark provided an up-to-date reference of the best achievable outcomes for surgical auditing and benchmarking.
Keywords: benchmark; global; hepatectomy; laparoscopic right posterior sectionectomy; minimally invasive.
Copyright © 2024 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.
Conflict of interest statement
B.K.P.G. has received travel grants and honorarium from Johnson and Johnson and Olympus. Also, partially funded by a grant from the Intuitive Foundation for this work. M.M. is a consultant for CAVA robotics LLC. J.P. reports a research grant from Intuitive Surgical Deutschland GmbH and personal fees or non-financial support from Johnson & Johnson, Medtronic, AFS Medical, Astellas, CHG Meridian, Chiesi, Falk Foundation, La Fource Group, Merck, Neovii, NOGGO, pharma-consult Peterson, and Promedicis. Moritz Schmelzle reports personal fees or other support outside of the submitted work from Merck, Bayer, ERBE, Amgen, Johnson & Johnson, Takeda, Olympus, Medtronic, Intuitive. Asmund Fretland reports receiving speaker fees from Bayer. vi) Fernando Rotellar reports speaker fees and support outside the submitted work from Integra, Medtronic, Olympus, Corza, Sirtex and Johnson & Johnson. R.T. reports speaker fees and support outside the submitted work from Integra, Stryker, Medtronic, Medistim, MSD. T.P.K. was partially supported by the US National Cancer Institute MSKCC Core Grant number P30 CA008747 for this study. M.Y. was partially funded by the Research Project of Zhejiang Provincial Public Welfare Fund project in the Field of Social development (LGF20H160028). The remaining authors report no conflicts of interest.
References
-
- Staiger RD, Schwandt H, Puhan MA, et al. Improving surgical outcomes through benchmarking. Br J Surg. 2019;106:59–64.
-
- Goh BKP, Han H-S, Chen K-H, et al. Defining global benchmarks for laparoscopic liver resections: an international multicenter study. Ann Surg. 2023;277:e839–e848.
-
- Kawaguchi Y, Fuks D, Kokudo N, et al. Difficulty of laparoscopic liver resection: proposal for a new classification. Ann Surg. 2018;267:13–17.
-
- Teo JY, Kam JH, Chan CY, et al. Laparoscopic liver resection for posterosuperior and anterolateral lesions-a comparison experience in an Asian centre. Hepatobiliary Surg Nutr. 2015;4:379–390.
-
- Nagino M, DeMatteo R, Lang H, et al. Proposal of a new comprehensive notation for hepatectomy: the “new world” terminology. Ann Surg. 2021;274:1–3.

