The Volume Effect in Liver Surgery—A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
There is an inverse relationship between hospital and surgeon volume and mortality in many types of complex surgery. The aim of this paper is to investigate the volume effect on outcomes of liver surgery.
A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed. A literature search was conducted using Medline and EMBASE from 1995 to 2012. A random effects model was used.
Seventeen studies were selected for detailed analysis. Definition of a high-volume institution varied from 2 to more than 33 procedures per year. The pooled odds ratio of mortality rate in low- vs high-volume centres was 2.0 [95 % confidence interval (CI), 1.6–2.4; P < 0.001]. Some studies divided centres into more than two groups and compared the highest and lowest volume groups. The pooled odds ratio of mortality rate for this comparison type was 3.2 (95 % CI, 1.7–5.8; P < 0.001). Funnel plots suggest possible publication bias. There was inadequate data to compare morbidity. Only two of seven studies demonstrated a shorter length of stay in the high-volume centres. There was no convincing volume effect on long-term survival.
This study suggests a strong relationship between volume and perioperative mortality. No difference in morbidity, length of stay or survival was demonstrated.
KeywordsLiver surgery Hepatectomy Morbidity Mortality Cancer surgery Regionalisation High volume
- 13.Harris R, Bradburn M, Deeks J, Harbord R, Altman D, Sterne J. Metan: fixed- and random-effects meta-analysis. The Stata Journal. 2008;8(1):3–28.Google Scholar
- 23.Yasunaga H, Horiguchi H, Matsuda S, Fushimi K, Hashimoto H, Ohe K, et al. Relationship between hospital volume and operative mortality for liver resection: data from the Japanese Diagnosis Procedure Combination database. Hepatol Res. 2012;42:1073–80.Google Scholar
- 37.Poon RT, Fan ST, Lo CM, Liu CL, Lam CM, Yuen WK, et al. Improving perioperative outcome expands the role of hepatectomy in management of benign and malignant hepatobiliary diseases: analysis of 1222 consecutive patients from a prospective database. Annals of Surgery. 2004;240(4):698–708.Google Scholar
- 55.Pronovost P, Angus DC. Using large-scale databases to measure outcomes in critical care. Critical Care Clinics. 1999;15(3):615–31, vii–viii.Google Scholar
- 66.Suzuki H, Gotoh M, Sugihara K, Kitagawa Y, Kimura W, Kondo S, et al. Nationwide survey and establishment of a clinical database for gastrointestinal surgery in Japan: targeting integration of a cancer registration system and improving the outcome of cancer treatment. Cancer Sci. 2011;102(1):226–30.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar