Laparoscopic versus open hepatic resection in patients ≥75 years old: A NSQIP analysis evaluating 2674 patients.

IF 2 3区 医学 Q3 ONCOLOGY
Kevin Verhoeff, Juan Glinka, Douglas Quan, Anton Skaro, Ephraim S Tang
{"title":"Laparoscopic versus open hepatic resection in patients ≥75 years old: A NSQIP analysis evaluating 2674 patients.","authors":"Kevin Verhoeff, Juan Glinka, Douglas Quan, Anton Skaro, Ephraim S Tang","doi":"10.1002/jso.27820","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Previous studies report promising outcomes with minimally invasive (MIS) hepatectomy in elderly patients but remain limited by small size. This study aims to comparatively evaluate the demographics and outcomes of geriatric patients undergoing MIS and open hepatectomy.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>The 2016-2021 NSQIP database was evaluated comparing patients ≥75 undergoing MIS versus open hepatectomy. Patient selection and outcomes were compared using bivariate analysis with multivariable modeling (MVR) evaluating factors associated with serious complications and mortality. Propensity score matched (PSM) analysis further evaluated serious complications, mortality, length of stay (LOS), Clavien Dindo Classification (CDC), and Comprehensive Complication Index (CCI) for cohorts.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We evaluated 2674 patients with 681 (25.5%) receiving MIS hepatectomy. MIS approaches were used more for partial lobectomy (85.9% vs. 61.7%; p < 0.001), and required fewer biliary reconstructions (1.6% vs. 10.6%; p < 0.001). Patients were similar with regards to sex, body mass index, and other comorbidities. Unadjusted analysis demonstrated that MIS approaches had fewer serious complications (8.8% vs. 18.7%; p < 0.001). However, after controlling for cohort differences the MIS approach was not associated with reduced likelihood of serious complications (odds ratio [OR]: 0.77; p = 0.219) or mortality (OR: 1.19; p = 0.623). PSM analysis further supported no difference in serious complications (p = 0.403) or mortality (p = 0.446). However, following PSM a significant reduction in LOS (-1.99 days; p < 0.001), CDC (-0.26 points; p = 0.016) and CCI (-2.79 points; p = 0.022) was demonstrated with MIS approaches.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This is the largest study comparing MIS and open hepatectomy in elderly patients. Results temper previously reported outcomes but support reduced LOS and complications with MIS approaches.</p>","PeriodicalId":17111,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Surgical Oncology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Surgical Oncology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/jso.27820","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Previous studies report promising outcomes with minimally invasive (MIS) hepatectomy in elderly patients but remain limited by small size. This study aims to comparatively evaluate the demographics and outcomes of geriatric patients undergoing MIS and open hepatectomy.

Method: The 2016-2021 NSQIP database was evaluated comparing patients ≥75 undergoing MIS versus open hepatectomy. Patient selection and outcomes were compared using bivariate analysis with multivariable modeling (MVR) evaluating factors associated with serious complications and mortality. Propensity score matched (PSM) analysis further evaluated serious complications, mortality, length of stay (LOS), Clavien Dindo Classification (CDC), and Comprehensive Complication Index (CCI) for cohorts.

Results: We evaluated 2674 patients with 681 (25.5%) receiving MIS hepatectomy. MIS approaches were used more for partial lobectomy (85.9% vs. 61.7%; p < 0.001), and required fewer biliary reconstructions (1.6% vs. 10.6%; p < 0.001). Patients were similar with regards to sex, body mass index, and other comorbidities. Unadjusted analysis demonstrated that MIS approaches had fewer serious complications (8.8% vs. 18.7%; p < 0.001). However, after controlling for cohort differences the MIS approach was not associated with reduced likelihood of serious complications (odds ratio [OR]: 0.77; p = 0.219) or mortality (OR: 1.19; p = 0.623). PSM analysis further supported no difference in serious complications (p = 0.403) or mortality (p = 0.446). However, following PSM a significant reduction in LOS (-1.99 days; p < 0.001), CDC (-0.26 points; p = 0.016) and CCI (-2.79 points; p = 0.022) was demonstrated with MIS approaches.

Conclusions: This is the largest study comparing MIS and open hepatectomy in elderly patients. Results temper previously reported outcomes but support reduced LOS and complications with MIS approaches.

腹腔镜与开腹肝切除术在年龄≥75 岁患者中的应用:对 2674 例患者进行评估的 NSQIP 分析。
背景:以前的研究报告称,老年患者接受微创(MIS)肝切除术的疗效很好,但由于规模较小,仍然受到限制。本研究旨在比较评估接受 MIS 和开放式肝切除术的老年患者的人口统计学特征和疗效:方法:对2016-2021年NSQIP数据库进行评估,比较≥75岁的患者接受MIS与开腹肝切除术的情况。通过双变量分析和多变量建模(MVR)评估与严重并发症和死亡率相关的因素,对患者的选择和预后进行比较。倾向评分匹配(PSM)分析进一步评估了严重并发症、死亡率、住院时间(LOS)、克拉维恩-丁多分类(CDC)和队列综合并发症指数(CCI):我们对 2674 名患者进行了评估,其中 681 人(25.5%)接受了 MIS 肝切除术。MIS方法更多地用于肝叶部分切除术(85.9%对61.7%;P 结论:这是比较MIS和MIS肝切除术的最大规模研究:这是比较老年患者 MIS 和开放式肝切除术的最大规模研究。研究结果与之前报道的结果一致,但支持采用MIS方法可缩短住院时间并减少并发症。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.70
自引率
4.00%
发文量
367
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: The Journal of Surgical Oncology offers peer-reviewed, original papers in the field of surgical oncology and broadly related surgical sciences, including reports on experimental and laboratory studies. As an international journal, the editors encourage participation from leading surgeons around the world. The JSO is the representative journal for the World Federation of Surgical Oncology Societies. Publishing 16 issues in 2 volumes each year, the journal accepts Research Articles, in-depth Reviews of timely interest, Letters to the Editor, and invited Editorials. Guest Editors from the JSO Editorial Board oversee multiple special Seminars issues each year. These Seminars include multifaceted Reviews on a particular topic or current issue in surgical oncology, which are invited from experts in the field.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信