Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Regionalization to Improve Outcomes in Pancreatic Surgery

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Textbook of Pancreatic Cancer

Abstract

Centralization has been defined as the concentration of healthcare resources, including infrastructure, staff, materials, knowledge and research which leads to improved quality of care and financial efficiency. A heavy centralization may boost volumes and outcomes in large centers but may not necessarily ensure that the population at risk is offered equal access to care. The process of centralization (or, regionalization) of care should also take into account the complexity of services provided. The need for single-organ surgeons or broadly trained HPB surgeons or even surgical oncologists may largely vary between regions, population density, the insurance or payer system and the health care system at large. This chapter aims to present some of the ongoing issues with centralization of surgical care, and the benefits and barriers associated with this.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 99.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 129.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Gouma DJ, Obertop H. Centralization of surgery for periampullary malignancy. Br J Surg. 1999;86:1361–2.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Soreide K, Nymo LS, Lassen K. Centralization of pancreatic surgery in Europe: an update. J Gastrointest Surg. 2019;23:2322–3.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Massoumi RL, Hines OJ. Aggregating pancreatic cancer care to specialized centers—a high-value decision? JAMA Surg. 2019;154(10):e193020.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Luft HS, Bunker JP, Enthoven AC. Should operations be regionalized? The empirical relation between surgical volume and mortality. N Engl J Med. 1979;301:1364–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Tol JA, van Gulik TM, Busch OR, et al. Centralization of highly complex low-volume procedures in upper gastrointestinal surgery. A summary of systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Dig Surg. 2012;29:374–83.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Gooiker GA, van Gijn W, Wouters MW, et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of the volume-outcome relationship in pancreatic surgery. Br J Surg. 2011;98:485–94.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Gagliardi AR, Soong D, Gallinger S. Identifying factors influencing pancreatic cancer management to inform quality improvement efforts and future research: a scoping systematic review. Pancreas. 2016;45:161–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Mohammed S, Fisher WE. Quality metrics in pancreatic surgery. Surg Clin North Am. 2013;93:693–709.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Vonlanthen R, Lodge P, Barkun JS, et al. Toward a consensus on centralization in surgery. Ann Surg. 2018;268:712–24.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Graham LA, Mull HJ, Wagner TH, et al. Comparison of a potential hospital quality metric with existing metrics for surgical quality-associated readmission. JAMA Netw Open. 2019;2:e191313.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Dimick JB, Staiger DO, Baser O, et al. Composite measures for predicting surgical mortality in the hospital. Health Aff (Millwood). 2009;28:1189–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Nolan T, Berwick DM. All-or-none measurement raises the bar on performance. JAMA. 2006;295:1168–70.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Mehta R, Paredes AZ, Tsilimigras DI, et al. Influence of hospital teaching status on the chance to achieve a textbook outcome after hepatopancreatic surgery for cancer among Medicare beneficiaries. Surgery. 2020;168(1):92–100.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. van Roessel S, Mackay TM, van Dieren S, et al. Textbook outcome: nationwide analysis of a novel quality measure in pancreatic surgery. Ann Surg. 2020;271:155–62.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Busweiler LA, Schouwenburg MG, van Berge Henegouwen MI, et al. Textbook outcome as a composite measure in oesophagogastric cancer surgery. Br J Surg. 2017;104:742–50.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Merath K, Chen Q, Bagante F, et al. A multi-institutional international analysis of textbook outcomes among patients undergoing curative-intent resection of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma. JAMA Surg. 2019;154:e190571.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Levy J, Gupta V, Amirazodi E, et al. Gastrectomy case volume and textbook outcome: an analysis of the Population Registry of Esophageal and Stomach Tumours of Ontario (PRESTO). Gastric Cancer. 2020;23:391–402.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Birkmeyer JD, Siewers AE, Finlayson EV, et al. Hospital volume and surgical mortality in the United States. N Engl J Med. 2002;346:1128–37.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Begg CB, Cramer LD, Hoskins WJ, et al. Impact of hospital volume on operative mortality for major cancer surgery. JAMA. 1998;280:1747–51.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Williamsson C, Ansari D, Andersson R, et al. Postoperative pancreatic fistula-impact on outcome, hospital cost and effects of centralization. HPB (Oxford). 2017;19:436–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. El Amrani M, Clement G, Lenne X, et al. Failure-to-rescue in patients undergoing pancreatectomy: is hospital volume a standard for quality improvement programs? Nationwide analysis of 12,333 patients. Ann Surg. 2018;268:799–807.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Bateni SB, Olson JL, Hoch JS, et al. Drivers of cost for pancreatic surgery: it’s not about hospital volume. Ann Surg Oncol. 2018;25:3804–11.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. Wilson GC, Geller DA. Facility type is another factor in the volume-outcome relationship for complex hepatopancreatobiliary procedures. Ann Surg Oncol. 2019;26:3811–2.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Wasif N, Etzioni DA, Habermann EB, et al. Does improved mortality at low- and medium-volume hospitals lead to attenuation of the volume to outcomes relationship for major visceral surgery? J Am Coll Surg. 2018;227:85–93.e9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Brown EG, Bateni SB, Burgess D, et al. Interhospital variability in quality outcomes of pancreatic surgery. J Surg Res. 2019;235:453–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Haneuse S, Dominici F, Normand SL, et al. Assessment of between-hospital variation in readmission and mortality after cancer surgical procedures. JAMA Netw Open. 2018;1:e183038.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. Gottlieb-Vedi E, Mattsson F, Lagergren P, et al. Annual hospital volume of surgery for gastrointestinal cancer in relation to prognosis. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2019;45(10):1839–46.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Derogar M, Blomberg J, Sadr-Azodi O. Hospital teaching status and volume related to mortality after pancreatic cancer surgery in a national cohort. Br J Surg. 2015;102:548–57; discussion 557.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. van Rijssen LB, Zwart MJ, van Dieren S, et al. Variation in hospital mortality after pancreatoduodenectomy is related to failure to rescue rather than major complications: a nationwide audit. HPB (Oxford). 2018;20:759–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Nymo LS, Soreide K, Kleive D, et al. The effect of centralization on short term outcomes of pancreatoduodenectomy in a universal health care system. HPB (Oxford). 2019;21:319–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Soreide K, Olsen F, Nymo LS, et al. A nationwide cohort study of resection rates and short-term outcomes in open and laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy. HPB (Oxford). 2019;21(6):669–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Soreide K, Nymo LS, Kleive D, et al. Variation in use of open and laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy and associated outcome metrics in a universal health care system. Pancreatology. 2019;19:880–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Hyder O, Sachs T, Ejaz A, et al. Impact of hospital teaching status on length of stay and mortality among patients undergoing complex hepatopancreaticobiliary surgery in the USA. J Gastrointest Surg. 2013;17:2114–22.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  34. Dimick JB, Cowan JA Jr, Colletti LM, et al. Hospital teaching status and outcomes of complex surgical procedures in the United States. Arch Surg. 2004;139:137–41.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Harmon JW, Tang DG, Gordon TA, et al. Hospital volume can serve as a surrogate for surgeon volume for achieving excellent outcomes in colorectal resection. Ann Surg. 1999;230:404–11; discussion 411–3.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  36. Hachey K, Morgan R, Rosen A, et al. Quality comes with the (anatomic) territory: evaluating the impact of surgeon operative mix on patient outcomes after pancreaticoduodenectomy. Ann Surg Oncol. 2018;25:3795–803.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Learn PA, Bach PB. A decade of mortality reductions in major oncologic surgery: the impact of centralization and quality improvement. Med Care. 2010;48:1041–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Wasif N, Etzioni D, Habermann EB, et al. Contemporary improvements in postoperative mortality after major cancer surgery are associated with weakening of the volume-outcome association. Ann Surg Oncol. 2019;26:2348–56.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Sheetz KH, Dimick JB, Ghaferi AA. Impact of hospital characteristics on failure to rescue following major surgery. Ann Surg. 2016;263:692–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Ahola R, Sand J, Laukkarinen J. Centralization of pancreatic surgery improves results: review. Scand J Surg. 2020;109:4–10.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Brooke BS, Goodney PP, Kraiss LW, et al. Readmission destination and risk of mortality after major surgery: an observational cohort study. Lancet. 2015;386:884–95.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  42. Polonski A, Izbicki JR, Uzunoglu FG. Centralization of pancreatic surgery in Europe. J Gastrointest Surg. 2019;23:2081–92.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Farges O, Bendersky N, Truant S, et al. The theory and practice of pancreatic surgery in France. Ann Surg. 2017;266:797–804.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Balzano G, Guarneri G, Pecorelli N, et al. Modelling centralization of pancreatic surgery in a nationwide analysis. Br J Surg. 2020; in press. https://doi.org/10.1002/bjs.11716.

  45. Cardini B, Primavesi F, Maglione M, et al. Outcomes following pancreatic resections—results and challenges of an Austrian university hospital compared to nationwide data and international centres. Eur Surg. 2019;51:81–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Krautz C, Nimptsch U, Weber GF, et al. Effect of hospital volume on in-hospital morbidity and mortality following pancreatic surgery in Germany. Ann Surg. 2018;267:411–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Antila A, Ahola R, Sand J, et al. Management of postoperative complications may favour the centralization of distal pancreatectomies. Nationwide data on pancreatic distal resections in Finland 2012-2014. Pancreatology. 2019;19:26–30.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Tingstedt B, Andersson B, Jonsson C, et al. First results from the Swedish National Pancreatic and Periampullary Cancer Registry. HPB (Oxford). 2019;21:34–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Coupland VH, Konfortion J, Jack RH, et al. Resection rate, hospital procedure volume and survival in pancreatic cancer patients in England: population-based study, 2005-2009. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2016;42:190–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Gooiker GA, van der Geest LG, Wouters MW, et al. Quality improvement of pancreatic surgery by centralization in the western part of the Netherlands. Ann Surg Oncol. 2011;18:1821–9.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  51. de Wilde RF, Besselink MG, van der Tweel I, et al. Impact of nationwide centralization of pancreaticoduodenectomy on hospital mortality. Br J Surg. 2012;99:404–10.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Nimptsch U, Krautz C, Weber GF, et al. Nationwide in-hospital mortality following pancreatic surgery in Germany is higher than anticipated. Ann Surg. 2016;264:1082–90.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Urbach DR. Pledging to eliminate low-volume surgery. N Engl J Med. 2015;373:1388–90.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Schwartz DM, Fong ZV, Warshaw AL, et al. The hidden consequences of the volume pledge: “no patient left behind”? Ann Surg. 2017;265:273–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Blanco BA, Kothari AN, Blackwell RH, et al. “Take the volume pledge” may result in disparity in access to care. Surgery. 2017;161:837–45.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Wasif N, Etzioni D, Habermann EB, et al. Racial and socioeconomic differences in the use of high-volume commission on cancer-accredited hospitals for cancer surgery in the United States. Ann Surg Oncol. 2018;25:1116–25.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Liu JH, Zingmond DS, McGory ML, et al. Disparities in the utilization of high-volume hospitals for complex surgery. JAMA. 2006;296:1973–80.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Bateni SB, Gingrich AA, Hoch JS, et al. Defining value for pancreatic surgery in early-stage pancreatic cancer. JAMA Surg. 2019;154:e193019.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  59. Chhabra KR, Dimick JB. Strategies for improving surgical care: when is regionalization the right choice? JAMA Surg. 2016;151:1001–2.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Diaz A, Pawlik TM. Optimal location for centralization of hospitals performing pancreas resection in California. JAMA Surg. 2019;155(3):261–3.

    Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  61. Gold JS. Linking disparities to outcomes in pancreatic cancer: inching toward answers. JAMA Surg. 2020;155(2):e195082.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Goodman DC, Fisher E, Stukel TA, et al. The distance to community medical care and the likelihood of hospitalization: is closer always better? Am J Public Health. 1997;87:1144–50.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  63. Versteeg SE, Ho VKY, Siesling S, et al. Centralisation of cancer surgery and the impact on patients’ travel burden. Health Policy. 2018;122:1028–34.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Kilsdonk MJ, Siesling S, van Dijk BAC, et al. What drives centralisation in cancer care? PLoS One. 2018;13:e0195673.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Clinical Surgery, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK

    Rachel V. Guest

  2. Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, HPB Unit, Stavanger University Hospital, Stavanger, Norway

    Kjetil Søreide

  3. Department of Clinical Medicine, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway

    Kjetil Søreide

Authors
  1. Rachel V. Guest
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Kjetil Søreide
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Stavanger University Hospital, The University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway

    Kjetil Søreide

  2. Chirurgie (VTT), Innsbruck Medical University, Innsbruck, Tirol, Austria

    Stefan Stättner

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2021 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Guest, R.V., Søreide, K. (2021). Regionalization to Improve Outcomes in Pancreatic Surgery. In: Søreide, K., Stättner, S. (eds) Textbook of Pancreatic Cancer. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-53786-9_9

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-53786-9_9

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-53785-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-53786-9

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation