Department of Surgery, University of California, Irvine, 333 City Blvd. West Suite 850, Orange, CA, 92868, USA.
Surg Endosc. 2013 Dec;27(12):4539-46. doi: 10.1007/s00464-013-3112-3. Epub 2013 Aug 13.
The relationship between volume and outcomes in bariatric surgery is well established in the literature. However, the analyses were performed primarily in the open surgery era and in the absence of national accreditation. The recent Metabolic Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program proposed an annual threshold volume of 50 stapling cases. This study aimed to examine the effect of volume and accreditation on surgical outcomes for bariatric surgery in this laparoscopic era.
The Nationwide Inpatient Sample was used for analysis of the outcomes experienced by morbidly obese patients who underwent an elective laparoscopic stapling bariatric surgical procedure between 2006 and 2010. In this analysis, low-volume centers (LVC < 50 stapling cases/year) were compared with high-volume centers (HVC ≥ 50 stapling cases/year). Multivariate analysis was performed to examine risk-adjusted serious morbidity and in-hospital mortality between the LVCs and HVCs. Additionally, within the HVC group, risk-adjusted outcomes of accredited versus nonaccredited centers were examined.
Between 2006 and 2010, 277,760 laparoscopic stapling bariatric procedures were performed, with 85% of the cases managed at HVCs. The mean number of laparoscopic stapling cases managed per year was 17 ± 14 at LVCs and 144 ± 117 at HVCs. The in-hospital mortality was higher at LVCs (0.17%) than at HVCs (0.07%). Multivariate analysis showed that laparoscopic stapling procedures performed at LVCs had higher rates of mortality than those performed at HVCs [odds ratio (OR) 2.5; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.3-4.8; p < 0.01] as well as higher rates of serious morbidity (OR 1.2; 95% CI 1.1-1.4; p < 0.01). The in-hospital mortality rate at nonaccredited HVCs was 0.22% compared with 0.06% at accredited HVCs. Multivariate analysis showed that nonaccredited centers had higher rates of mortality than accredited centers (OR 3.6; 95% CI 1.5-8.3; p < 0.01) but lower rates of serious morbidity (OR 0.8; 95% CI 0.7-0.9; p < 0.01).
In this era of laparoscopy, hospitals managing more than 50 laparoscopic stapling cases per year have improved outcomes. However, nonaccredited HVCs have outcomes similar to those of LVCs. Therefore, the impact of accreditation on outcomes may be greater than that of volume.
减重手术中,手术量与手术结果之间的关系在文献中已经得到充分证实。然而,这些分析主要是在开放手术时代进行的,且没有全国性的认证。最近的代谢减重手术认证和质量改进计划提出了每年 50 例吻合器手术的门槛量。本研究旨在检查在腹腔镜时代,手术量和认证对减重手术结果的影响。
本研究利用 2006 年至 2010 年间全国住院患者样本,对接受择期腹腔镜吻合器减重手术的病态肥胖患者的结局进行分析。在此分析中,低容量中心(LVC<50 例吻合器手术/年)与高容量中心(HVC≥50 例吻合器手术/年)进行比较。采用多变量分析比较 LVC 和 HVC 之间风险调整后的严重发病率和住院死亡率。此外,在 HVC 组内,还比较了认证和非认证中心的风险调整后结局。
2006 年至 2010 年间,共完成 277760 例腹腔镜吻合器减重手术,其中 85%的手术在 HVC 进行。LVC 每年管理的腹腔镜吻合器手术平均例数为 17±14,HVC 为 144±117。LVC 的住院死亡率(0.17%)高于 HVC(0.07%)。多变量分析显示,LVC 行腹腔镜吻合器手术的死亡率高于 HVC[比值比(OR)2.5;95%置信区间(CI)1.3-4.8;p<0.01],严重发病率也更高(OR 1.2;95%CI 1.1-1.4;p<0.01)。非认证 HVC 的住院死亡率为 0.22%,而认证 HVC 为 0.06%。多变量分析显示,非认证中心的死亡率高于认证中心(OR 3.6;95%CI 1.5-8.3;p<0.01),但严重发病率较低(OR 0.8;95%CI 0.7-0.9;p<0.01)。
在腹腔镜时代,每年管理超过 50 例腹腔镜吻合器手术的医院手术结果得到改善。然而,非认证 HVC 的结果与 LVC 相似。因此,认证对结果的影响可能大于手术量。