Search

Background: Debate exists regarding outcomes of robot-assisted versus laparoscopic hepatectomy. We reviewed and analyzed major hepatectomies (resection of ≥3 Couinaud liver segments) performed in a minimally invasive fashion at a single institution., Methods: From 2011 to 2016, 473 major hepatectomy procedures were performed, of which 173 (37%) were performed in a minimally invasive fashion (57 robot-assisted and 116 laparoscopic). Patient demographics, operating statistics and outcomes were analyzed retrospectively., Results: Patients undergoing robot-assisted versus laparoscopic hepatectomy were older (58.1 vs 53.2 years, respectively; p = 0.030), admitted to ICU postoperatively less frequently (43.9% vs 61.2%, respectively; p = 0.043), and readmitted less often within 90 days (7.0% vs 28.5%, respectively; p = 0.001). No significant differences were identified in relation to complications, blood loss, operative times, and length of stay., Conclusion: Robot-assisted is an effective alternative to laparoscopic major hepatectomy for resection of malignant and benign liver lesions. Robotic-assisted offers technical advantages compared to laparoscopic surgery including improved optic visualization, operative dexterity, and ease of dissection and suturing. This experience suggested that the robotic platform was associated with improved outcomes including reduced postoperative ICU admission and 90-day readmission., (Copyright © 2018 International Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association Inc. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program ® (NSQIP) Surgical Risk. Calculator (SRC) estimates postoperative outcomes. The aim of this study was to develop and validate a specific predictive outcomes model for cholecystectomy procedures., Methods: Patients who underwent cholecystectomy between 2008 and 2016 and were deemed too high risk for acute care general surgery (GS) and had surgery performed by the Division of Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery (HPB) were identified. Outcomes of the HPB cholecystectomies were matched against cholecystectomies performed by GS. New predictive models for postoperative outcomes were constructed. Area under the curve was used to assess predictive accuracy for both models and internal validation was performed using bootstrap logistic regression., Results: A total of 169/934 (18%) cholecystectomies were identified as too high risk for GS. These 169 patients were matched with 126 patients who had cholecystectomy performed by GS. For GS and HPB cholecystectomies, the proposed model demonstrated better discriminative ability compared to the SRC based on ROC curves (proposed model: 0.589-0.982; SRC: 0.570-0.836) for each of the predicted outcomes., Conclusion: For patients undergoing cholecystectomy, customized models are superior for predicting individual perioperative risk and allow more accurate, patient-specific delivery of care., (Copyright © 2018 International Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association Inc. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: The American College of Surgeons NSQIP ® Surgical Risk Calculator (SRC) was developed to estimate postoperative outcomes. Our goal was to develop and validate an institution-specific risk calculator for patients undergoing major hepatectomy at Carolinas Medical Center (CMC)., Methods: Outcomes generated by the SRC were recorded for 139 major hepatectomies performed at CMC (2008-2016). Novel predictive models for seven postoperative outcomes were constructed and probabilities calculated. Brier score and area under the curve (AUC) were employed to assess accuracy. Internal validation was performed using bootstrap logistic regression. Logistic regression models were constructed using bivariate and multivariate analyses., Results: Brier scores showed no significant difference in the predictive ability of the SRC and CMC model. Significant differences in the discriminative ability of the models were identified at the individual level. Both models closely predicted 30-day mortality (SRC AUC: 0.867; CMC AUC: 0.815). The CMC model was a stronger predictor of individual postoperative risk for six of seven outcomes (SRC AUC: 0.531-0.867; CMC AUC: 0.753-0.970)., Conclusion: Institution-specific models provide superior outcome predictions of perioperative risk for patients undergoing major hepatectomy. If properly developed and validated, institution-specific models can be used to deliver more accurate, patient-specific care., (Copyright © 2018 International Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association Inc. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Outcomes following repair of common bile duct injury (CBDI) are influenced by center and surgeon experience. Determinants of morbidity related to timing of repair are not fully described in this population., Methods: Patients with CBDI managed surgically at a single center from January 2008 to June 2015 were retrospectively reviewed. Outcomes of patients undergoing early (≤48 h from injury) and delayed (>48 h) repair were compared. Predictive modeling for readmission was performed for patients undergoing delayed repair., Results: In total, 61 patients underwent surgical biliary reconstruction. Between the early and delayed repair groups, no differences were found in patient demographics, injury classification subtype, vasculobiliary injury (VBI) incidence, hospital length of stay, 30-day readmission rate, or 90-day mortality rate. Patients undergoing delayed repair exhibited increased chance of readmission if VBI was present or if multiple endoscopic procedures were performed prior to repair. A predictive model was constructed with these variables (ROC 0.681)., Conclusion: When managed by a tertiary hepatopancreatobiliary center, equivalent outcomes can be realized for patients undergoing early and delayed repair of CBDI. Establishment of evidence-based consensus guidelines for evaluation and treatment of CBDI may allow identification of factors that drive morbidity and predict clinical outcomes in this population., (Copyright © 2016 International Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association Inc. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Hepato-pancreato-biliary (HPB) fellowships in North America are difficult to secure with an acceptance rate of 1 in 3 applicants. Desirable characteristics in an HPB surgery applicant have not been previously reported. This study examines the perceptions of trainees and HPB program directors with regards to positive attributes in applicants for HPB fellowships., Methods: Parallel surveys were distributed by email with a web-link to current and recent HPB fellows in North America (from the past 5 years) with questions addressing the following domains: surgical training, research experience, and mentorship. A similar survey was distributed to HPB fellowship program directors in North America requesting their opinion as to the importance of these characteristics in potential applicants., Results: 32 of 60 of surveyed fellows and 21 of 38 of surveyed program directors responded between November 2014-February 2015. Fellows overall came from fairly diverse backgrounds (13/32 were overseas medical graduates) about one third of respondents having had some prior research experience. Program directors gave priority to the applicant's interview, curriculum vitae, and their recommendation letters (in order of importance). Both the surveyed fellows and program directors felt that the characteristics most important in a successful HPB fellowship candidate include interpersonal skills, perceived operative skills, and perceived fund of knowledge., Conclusion: Results of this survey provide useful and practical information for trainees considering applying to an HPB fellowship program., (Copyright © 2016 International Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association Inc. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Hepato-pancreato-biliary (HPB) surgery is a complex subspecialty drawing from varied training pools, and the need for competency is rapidly growing. However, no board certification process or standardized training metrics in HPB surgery exist in the Americas. This study aims to assess the attitudes of current trainees and HPB surgeons regarding the state of training, surgical practice and the HPB surgical job market in the Americas., Study Design: A 20-question survey was distributed to members of Americas Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association (AHPBA) with a valid e-mail address who attended the 2014 AHPBA. Descriptive statistics were generated for both the aggregate survey responses and by training category., Results: There were 176 responses with evenly distributed training tracks; surgical oncology (44, 28%), transplant (39, 24.8%) and HPB (38, 24.2%). The remaining tracks were HPB/Complex gastrointestinal (GI) and HPB/minimally invasive surgery (MIS) (29, 16% and 7, 4%). 51.2% of respondents thought a dedicated HPB surgery fellowship would be the best way to train HPB surgeons, and 68.1% felt the optimal training period would be a 2-year clinical fellowship with research opportunities. This corresponded to the 67.5% of the practicing HPB surgeons who said they would prefer to attend an HPB fellowship for 2 years as well. Overall, most respondents indicated their ideal job description was clinical practice with the ability to engage in clinical and/or outcomes research (52.3%)., Conclusions: This survey has demonstrated that HPB surgery has many training routes and practice patterns in the Americas. It highlights the need for specialized HPB surgical training and career education. This survey shows that there are many ways to train in HPB. A 2-year HPB fellowship was felt to be the best way to train to prepare for a clinically active HPB practice with clinical and outcomes research focus., (© 2015 International Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association.)