Hepatic surgery at a VA tertiary medical center: lessons learned

Department of Surgery, University of California, San Francisco, USA.
American journal of surgery (Impact Factor: 2.41). 11/2010; 200(5):591-5. DOI: 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2010.07.014
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The development of a hepatic surgery center within a US Department of Veterans Affairs hospital is dependent on proper training and institutional support, which can translate into low operative morbidity and mortality rates.
Patients who underwent hepatic procedures between 2003 and 2009 were retrospectively reviewed. A subset analysis of laparoscopic liver resections for patients with hepatocellular cancer (HCC) was performed. One hundred twenty-six patients underwent 130 hepatic procedures, 65% of which were hepatic resections. Ninety-seven percent of cases were for malignant disease, including HCC (70%).
The morbidity and mortality rates were 15.5% and 2.4%, respectively. For patients with HCC there was no difference in operative outcomes or overall survival when procedures were performed laparoscopically.
A Veterans Affairs (VA) hospital specializing in hepatic surgery can achieve low complication rates comparable with those of high-volume centers. The numbers of patient referrals and hepatic resections and the proportion of laparoscopic operations increased after the creation of a dedicated hepatic surgery center within a single VA hospital.

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background Laparoscopic liver resection is growing in popularity, but the long-term outcome of patients undergoing laparoscopic liver resection for malignancy has not been established. This paper is a meta-analysis and compares the long-term survival of patients undergoing laparoscopic (LHep) versus open (OHep) liver resection for the treatment of malignant liver tumours. MethodsA PubMed database search identified comparative human studies analysing LHep versus OHep for malignant tumours. Clinical and survival parameters were extracted. The search was last conducted on 18 March 2012. ResultsIn total, 1002 patients in 15 studies were included (446 LHep and 556 OHep). A meta-analysis of overall survival showed no difference [1-year: odds ratio (OR) 0.71, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.42 to 1.20, P = 0.202; 3-years: OR 0.76, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.03, P = 0.076; 5-years: OR 0.8, 95% CI 0.59 to 1.10, P = 0.173]. Subset analyses of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and colorectal metastases (CRM) were performed. There was no difference in the 1-, 3-, and 5-year survival for HCC or in the 1-year survival for CRM, however, a survival advantage was found for CRM at 3years (LHep 80% versus OHep 67.4%, P = 0.036). Conclusions Laparoscopic surgery should be considered an acceptable alternative for the treatment of malignant liver tumours.
    HPB 05/2013; 16(2). DOI:10.1111/hpb.12117 · 2.05 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Liver resection (LR) for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and chronic liver disease (CLD) poses a high risk of serious postoperative complications and multicentric metachronous lesions requiring repeated treatment. The efficacy of laparoscopic LR (LLR) for such patients has yet to be established. The objective of this study is to test the outcomes of LLR for HCC with the aim of considering potential expansion of the indications for LLR. We performed a systematic review of the pertinent English-language literature. Our search yielded four meta-analyses and 23 comparative studies of LLR for HCC. On the basis of the findings from these studies and our newly conducted meta-analysis, the possibility for expanding the indications for LLR to HCC was examined. The studies show that LLR (vs open) for HCC generally yields better short-term outcomes without compromising long-term outcomes, and that incidences of postoperative ascites and liver failure are decreased with LLR. Several studies show the benefits of LLR for patients with severe CLD and for repeat surgery. Reductions of postoperative ascites and liver failure are among the advantages of LLR. These characteristics of LLR may allow us to expand the indications of LLR to HCC with CLD. © Japanese Society of. © 2015 Japanese Society of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic Surgery.
    Journal of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic Sciences 02/2015; DOI:10.1002/jhbp.215
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Hepatectomy is an advanced technique learned during surgical fellowship. Outcomes have not been described for hepatectomies involving fellows. We analyzed hepatectomies from the 2005-2011 National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database. We compared cases with a fellow (FELLOW group) and those without a fellow (ATTENDING group). FELLOW cases (n = 1,562; 54%) included more major hepatectomies and more metastasectomies (P < .002). Mortality was 3.2% versus 2.7% (P = .5) and morbidity was 30.7% vs 26.2% (P = .008) for FELLOW versus ATTENDING cases. On multivariate analysis, mortality was similar, but morbidity was greater in FELLOW cases (odds ratio [OR], 1.21; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.02-1.4; P = .03), with increased superficial surgical site infections (OR, 1.72; 95% CI, 1.2-2.4; P = .001). There were no differences in rates of sepsis, cardiac, pulmonary, or thromboembolic complications. Compared with ATTENDING cases, FELLOW cases during the first half of training, carried greater morbidity (OR, 1.43; 95% CI, 1.1-1.8; P = .006); however, this difference disappears by the second half of the academic year. Hepatectomy involving a fellow may be associated with an increased risk of surgical site infections. FELLOW cases were more complex. Mortality, cardiac, pulmonary, and other serious morbidities were similar. Despite slightly greater rates of surgical site infections, training in hepatic surgery maintains excellent patient outcomes.
    Surgery 07/2013; 154(5). DOI:10.1016/j.surg.2013.05.024 · 3.11 Impact Factor