TY - JOUR
T1 - Ideal Outcome After Pancreatoduodenectomy
T2 - A Transatlantic Evaluation of a Harmonized Composite Outcome Measure
AU - Augustinus, Simone
AU - MacKay, Tara M.
AU - Andersson, Bodil
AU - Beane, Joal D.
AU - Busch, Olivier R.
AU - Gleeson, Elizabeth M.
AU - Koerkamp, Bas G.
AU - Keck, Tobias
AU - Van Santvoort, Hjalmar C.
AU - Tingstedt, Bobby
AU - Wellner, Ulrich F.
AU - Williamsson, Caroline
AU - Besselink, Marc G.
AU - Pitt, Henry A.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
Copyright © 2023 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.
PY - 2023/11/1
Y1 - 2023/11/1
N2 - Objective: The aim of this study is to define and assess Ideal Outcome in the national or multicenter registries of North America, Germany, the Netherlands, and Sweden. Background: Assessing outcomes after pancreatoduodenectomy among centers and countries requires a broad evaluation that cannot be captured by a single parameter. Previously, 2 composite outcome measures (textbook outcome and optimal pancreatic surgery) for pancreatoduodenectomy have been described from Europe and the United States. These composites were harmonized into ideal outcome (IO). Methods: This analysis is a transatlantic retrospective study (2018-2020) of patients after pancreatoduodenectomy within the registries from North America, Germany, The Netherlands, and Sweden. After 3 consensus meetings, IO for pancreatoduodenectomy was defined as the absence of all 6 parameters: (1) in-hospital mortality, (2) severe complications - Clavien-Dindo ≥3, (3) postoperative pancreatic fistula - International Study Group of Pancreatic Surgery (ISGPS) grade B/C, (4) reoperation, (5) hospital stay >75th percentile, and (6) readmission. Outcomes were evaluated using relative largest difference (RLD) and absolute largest difference (ALD), and multivariate regression models. Results: Overall, 21,036 patients after pancreatoduodenectomy were included, of whom 11,194 (54%) reached IO. The rate of IO varied between 55% in North America, 53% in Germany, 52% in The Netherlands, and 54% in Sweden (RLD: 1.1, ALD: 3%, P<0.001). Individual components varied with an ALD of 2% length of stay, 4% for in-hospital mortality, 12% severe complications, 10% postoperative pancreatic fistula, 11% reoperation, and 9% readmission. Age, sex, absence of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, body mass index, performance status, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score, biliary drainage, absence of vascular resection, and histologic diagnosis were associated with IO. In the subgroup of patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma, country, and neoadjuvant chemotherapy also was associated with improved IO. Conclusions: The newly developed composite outcome measure "Ideal Outcome"can be used for auditing and comparing outcomes after pancreatoduodenectomy. The observed differences can be used to guide collaborative initiatives to further improve the outcomes of pancreatic surgery.
AB - Objective: The aim of this study is to define and assess Ideal Outcome in the national or multicenter registries of North America, Germany, the Netherlands, and Sweden. Background: Assessing outcomes after pancreatoduodenectomy among centers and countries requires a broad evaluation that cannot be captured by a single parameter. Previously, 2 composite outcome measures (textbook outcome and optimal pancreatic surgery) for pancreatoduodenectomy have been described from Europe and the United States. These composites were harmonized into ideal outcome (IO). Methods: This analysis is a transatlantic retrospective study (2018-2020) of patients after pancreatoduodenectomy within the registries from North America, Germany, The Netherlands, and Sweden. After 3 consensus meetings, IO for pancreatoduodenectomy was defined as the absence of all 6 parameters: (1) in-hospital mortality, (2) severe complications - Clavien-Dindo ≥3, (3) postoperative pancreatic fistula - International Study Group of Pancreatic Surgery (ISGPS) grade B/C, (4) reoperation, (5) hospital stay >75th percentile, and (6) readmission. Outcomes were evaluated using relative largest difference (RLD) and absolute largest difference (ALD), and multivariate regression models. Results: Overall, 21,036 patients after pancreatoduodenectomy were included, of whom 11,194 (54%) reached IO. The rate of IO varied between 55% in North America, 53% in Germany, 52% in The Netherlands, and 54% in Sweden (RLD: 1.1, ALD: 3%, P<0.001). Individual components varied with an ALD of 2% length of stay, 4% for in-hospital mortality, 12% severe complications, 10% postoperative pancreatic fistula, 11% reoperation, and 9% readmission. Age, sex, absence of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, body mass index, performance status, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score, biliary drainage, absence of vascular resection, and histologic diagnosis were associated with IO. In the subgroup of patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma, country, and neoadjuvant chemotherapy also was associated with improved IO. Conclusions: The newly developed composite outcome measure "Ideal Outcome"can be used for auditing and comparing outcomes after pancreatoduodenectomy. The observed differences can be used to guide collaborative initiatives to further improve the outcomes of pancreatic surgery.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85173559618&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - https://www.mendeley.com/catalogue/d5eb07d6-e41c-35cd-8d91-13413ebbbe0c/
U2 - 10.1097/SLA.0000000000006037
DO - 10.1097/SLA.0000000000006037
M3 - Journal articles
C2 - 37476990
AN - SCOPUS:85173559618
SN - 0003-4932
VL - 278
SP - 740
EP - 747
JO - Annals of Surgery
JF - Annals of Surgery
IS - 5
ER -