Surgical quality in organ procurement during day and night: an analysis of quality forms

OBJECTIVES: To analyse a potential association between surgical quality and time of day. DESIGN: A retrospective analysis of complete sets of quality forms filled out by the procuring and accepting surgeon on organs from deceased donors. SETTING: Procurement procedures in the Netherlands are organised per region. All procedures are performed by an independent, dedicated procurement team that is associated with an academic medical centre in the region. PARTICIPANTS: In 18 months' time, 771 organs were accepted and procured in The Netherlands. Of these, 17 organs were declined before transport and therefore excluded. For the remaining 754 organs, 591 (78%) sets of forms were completed (procurement and transplantation). Baseline characteristics were comparable in both daytime and evening/night-time with the exception of height (p=0.003). PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURE: All complete sets of quality forms were retrospectively analysed for the primary outcome, procurement-related surgical injury. Organs were categorised based on the starting time of the procurement in either daytime (8:00-17:00) or evening/night-time (17:00-8:00). RESULTS: Out of 591 procured organs, 129 organs (22%) were procured during daytime and 462 organs (78%) during evening/night-time. The incidence of surgical injury was significantly lower during daytime; 22 organs (17%) compared with 126 organs (27%) procured during evening/night-time (p=0.016). This association persists when adjusted for confounders. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows an increased incidence of procurement-related surgical injury in evening/night-time procedures as compared with daytime. Time of day might (in)directly influence surgical performance and should be considered a potential risk factor for injury in organ procurement procedures

Nationwide oncological networks for resection of colorectal liver metastases in the Netherlands:Differences and postoperative outcomes

INTRODUCTION: Widespread differences in patient demographics and disease burden between hospitals for resection of colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) have been described. In the Netherlands, networks consisting of at least one tertiary referral centre and several regional hospitals have been established to optimize treatment and outcomes. The aim of this study was to assess variation in case-mix, and outcomes between these networks. METHODS: This was a population-based study including all patients who underwent CRLM resection in the Netherlands between 2014 and 2019. Variation in case-mix and outcomes between seven networks covering the whole country was evaluated. Differences in case-mix, expected 30-day major morbidity (Clavien-Dindo ≥3a) and 30-day mortality between networks were assessed. RESULTS: In total 5383 patients were included. Thirty-day major morbidity was 5.7% and 30-day mortality was 1.5%. Significant differences between networks were observed for Charlson Comorbidity Index, ASA 3+, previous liver resection, liver disease, preoperative MRI, preoperative chemotherapy, ≥3 CRLM, diameter of largest CRLM ≥55 mm, major resection, combined resection and ablation, rectal primary tumour, bilobar and extrahepatic disease. Uncorrected 30-day major morbidity ranged between 3.3% and 13.1% for hospitals, 30-day mortality ranged between 0.0% and 4.5%. Uncorrected 30-day major morbidity ranged between 4.4% and 6.0% for networks, 30-day mortality ranged between 0.0% and 2.5%. No negative outliers were observed after case-mix correction. CONCLUSION: Variation in case-mix and outcomes are considerably smaller on a network level as compared to a hospital level. Therefore, auditing is more meaningful at a network level and collaboration of hospitals within networks should be pursued

Treatment strategies in colorectal cancer patients with initially unresectable liver-only metastases, a study protocol of the randomised phase 3 CAIRO5 study of the Dutch Colorectal Cancer Group (DCCG)

Background: Colorectal cancer patients with unresectable liver-only metastases may be cured after downsizing of metastases by neoadjuvant systemic therapy

Volume–outcome relationship of liver surgery: a nationwide analysis

Background: Evidence for an association between hospital volume and outcomes for liver surgery is abundant. The current Dutch guideline requires a minimum volume of 20 annual procedures per centre. The aim of this study was to investigate the association between hospital volume and postoperative outcomes using data from the nationwide Dutch Hepato Biliary Audit. Methods: This was a nationwide study in the Netherlands. All liver resections reported in the Dutch Hepato Biliary Audit between 2014 and 2017 were included. Annual centre volume was calculated and classified in categories of 20 procedures per year. Main outcomes were major morbidity (Clavien–Dindo grade IIIA or higher) and 30-day or in-hospital mortality. Results: A total of 5590 liver resections were done across 34 centres with a median annual centre volume of 35 (i.q.r. 20–69) procedures. Overall major morbidity and mortality rates were 11·2 and 2·0 per cent respectively. The mortality rate was 1·9 per cent after resection for colorectal liver metastases (CRLMs), 1·2 per cent for non-CRLMs, 0·4 per cent for benign tumours, 4·9 per cent for hepatocellular carcinoma and 10·3 per cent for biliary tumours. Higher-volume centres performed more major liver resections, and more resections for hepatocellular carcinoma and biliary cancer. There was no association between hospital volume and either major morbidity or mortality in multivariable analysis, after adjustment for known risk factors for adverse events. Conclusion: Hospital volume and postoperative outcomes were not associated

Colorectal liver metastases: Surgery versus thermal ablation (COLLISION) - a phase III single-blind prospective randomized controlled trial

Background: Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and microwave ablation (MWA) are widely accepted techniques to eliminate small unresectable colorectal liver metastases (CRLM). Although previous studies labelled thermal ablation inferior to surgical resection, the apparent selection bias when comparing patients with unresectable disease to surgical candidates, the superior safety profile, and the competitive overall survival results for the more recent reports mandate the setup of a randomized controlled trial. The objective of the COLLISION trial is to prove non-inferiority of thermal ablation compared to hepatic resection in patients with at least one resectable and ablatable CRLM and no extrahepatic disease. Methods: In this two-arm, single-blind multi-center phase-III clinical trial, six hundred and eighteen patients with at least one CRLM (≤3cm) will be included to undergo either surgical resection or thermal ablation of appointed target lesion(s) (≤3cm). Primary endpoint is OS (overall survival, intention-to-treat analysis). Main secondary endpoints are overall disease-free survival (DFS), time to progression (TTP), time to local progression (TTLP), primary and assisted technique efficacy (PTE, ATE), procedural morbidity and mortality, length of hospital stay, assessment of pain and quality of life (QoL), cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and quality-adjusted life years (QALY). Discussion: If thermal ablation proves to be non-inferior in treating lesions ≤3cm, a switch in treatment-method may lead to a reduction of the post-procedural morbidity and mortality, length of hospital stay and incremental costs without compromising oncological outcome for patients with CRLM. Trial registration:NCT03088150 , January 11th 2017

The portal-drained viscera release fibroblast growth factor 19 in humans

Fibroblast growth factor 19 (FGF19) is an ileum‐derived endrocrine factor that is produced in response to transepithelial bile salt flux. FGF19 represses bile salt synthesis in the liver. Despite the general assumption that FGF19 signals to the liver via portal blood, no human data are available to support this notion. The aim was to study portal FGF19 levels, and determined bile salt and FGF19 fluxes across visceral organs in humans. Bile salt and FGF19 levels were assessed in arterial, portal, and hepatic venous blood collected from fasted patients who underwent partial liver resection for colorectal liver metastases (n = 30). Fluxes across the portal‐drained viscera (PDV), liver, and splanchnic area were calculated. Portal bile salt levels (7.8 [5.0–12.4] μmol/L) were higher than levels in arterial (2.7 [1.7–5.5] μmol/L, P < 0.0001) and hepatic venous blood (3.4 [2.5–6.5] μmol/L, P < 0.0001). Bile salts released by the PDV (+1.2 [+0.7–+2.0] mmol kg(−1) h(−1), P < 0.0001) were largely taken up by the liver (−1.0 [−1.8 to −0.4] mmol kg(−1) h(−1), P < 0.0001). Portal levels of FGF19 (161 ± 78 pg/mL) were higher than arterial levels (135 ± 65 pg/mL, P = 0.046). A net release of FGF19 by the PDV (+4.0 [+2.1 to +9.9] ng kg(−1) h(−1), P < 0.0001) was calculated. There was no significant flux of FGF19 across the liver (−0.2 [−3.7 to +7.4] ng kg(−1) h(−1), P = 0.93). In conclusion, FGF19 levels in human portal blood are higher than in arterial blood. FGF19 is released by the portal‐drained viscera under fasted steady state conditions

Fast and accurate liver volumetry prior to hepatectomy

BACKGROUND: Volumetric assessment of the liver is essential in the prevention of postresectional liver failure after partial hepatectomy. Currently used methods are accurate but time-consuming. This study aimed to test a new automated method for preoperative volumetric liver assessment. METHODS: Patients who underwent a contrast enhanced portovenous phase CT-scan prior to hepatectomy in 2012 were included. Total liver volume (TLV) and future remnant liver volume (FRLV) were measured using TeraRecon Aquarius iNtuition(®) (autosegmentation) and OsiriX(®) (manual segmentation) software by two observers for each software package. Remnant liver volume percentage (RLV%) was calculated. Time needed to determine TLV and FRLV was measured. Inter-observer variability was assessed using Bland-Altman plots. RESULTS: Twenty-seven patients were included. There were no significant differences in measured volumes between OsiriX(®) and iNtuition(®). Moreover, there were significant correlations between the OsiriX(®) observers, the iNtuition(®) observers and between OsiriX(®) and iNtuition(®) post-processing systems (all R(2) > 0.97). The median time needed for complete liver volumetric analysis was 18.4 ± 4.9 min with OsiriX(®) and 5.8 ± 1.7 min using iNtuition(®) (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Both OsiriX(®) and iNtuition(®) liver volumetry are accurate and easily applicable. However, volumetric assessment of the liver with iNtuition(®) auto-segmentation is three times faster compared to manual OsiriX(®) volumetry

Outcomes of Resectability Assessment of the Dutch Colorectal Cancer Group Liver Metastases Expert Panel

BACKGROUND: Decision making on optimal treatment strategy in patients with initially unresectable colorectal cancer liver metastases (CRLM) remains complex because uniform criteria for (un) resectability are lacking. This study reports on the feasibility and short-term outcomes of The Dutch Colorectal Cancer Group Liver Expert Panel. STUDY DESIGN: The Expert Panel consists of 13 hepatobiliary surgeons and 4 radiologists. Resectability assessment is performed independently by 3 randomly assigned surgeons, and CRLM are scored as resectable, potentially resectable, or permanently unresectable. In absence of consensus, 2 additional surgeons are invited for a majority consensus. Patients with potentially resectable or unresectable CRLM at baseline are evaluated every 2 months of systemic therapy. Once CRLM are considered resectable, a treatment strategy is proposed. RESULTS: Overall, 398 panel evaluations in 183 patients were analyzed. The median time to panel conclusion was 7 days (interquartile range [IQR] 5-11 days). Intersurgeon disagreement was observed in 205 (52%) evaluations, with major disagreement (resectable vs permanently unresectable) in 42 (11%) evaluations. After systemic treatment, 106 patients were considered to have resectable CRLM, 84 of whom (79%) underwent a curative procedure. R0 resection (n = 41), R0 resection in combination with ablative treatment (n = 26), or ablative treatment only (n = 4) was achieved in 67 of 84 (80%) patients. CONCLUSIONS: This study analyzed prospective resectability evaluation of patients with CRLM by a panel of radiologists and liver surgeons. The high rate of disagreement among experienced liver surgeons reflects the complexity in defining treatment strategies for CRLM and supports the use of a panel rather than a single-surgeon decision. (C) 2019 by the American College of Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved