Skip to main content

Contemporary practice and short-term outcomes after liver resections in a complete national cohort



Improved outcome after liver resections have been reported in several series, but outcomes from national cohorts are scarce. Our aim was to evaluate nationwide practice and short-term outcomes after liver surgery in a universal healthcare system.


A complete 5-year cohort of all liver resections from the Norwegian Patient Registry (NPR). Short-term outcomes were aggregated length of stay (a-LoS), reoperation and 90-day mortality.


Of 2118 liver resections, 605 (28.6%) were major, median age was 65 years and 1184 (55%) were male. Most common indication was metastatic disease (n = 1554; 73.4%) and primary malignancy (n = 328; 15.3%). Laparoscopy was performed in 513 (33.9%) of minor and 37 (6.1%) of major liver resections and increased over time to 39.1% of minor resections in 2016. Median a-LoS was 12 days for major resections, 8 days for open minor and 3 days for laparoscopic minor resections. Reoperation was reported for 159 (7.4%) and 90-day mortality for 44 (2.1%). Primary malignancy, male gender, elderly patients and major resections were associated with poorer outcome.


In a national cohort, laparoscopy is used for a substantial proportion of minor resections and was associated with reduced a-LoS. Risk factors for reoperation and mortality were male gender, increased age and major resection for primary malignancy.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2


  1. Gilg S, Sparrelid E, Isaksson B, Lundell L, Nowak G, Stromberg C (2017) Mortality-related risk factors and long-term survival after 4460 liver resections in Sweden-a population-based study. Langenbeck’s Arch Surg 402:105–113.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Spaulding TP, Martin RCG 2nd (2017) Predicting adverse events in patients undergoing hepatectomy-validation of preoperative nomogram and risk score. HPB (Oxford) 19:1112–1118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Ramacciato G, D’Angelo F, Baldini R, Petrucciani N, Antolino L, Aurello P, Nigri G, Bellagamba R, Pezzoli F, Balesh A, Cucchetti A, Cescon M, Del Gaudio M, Ravaioli M, Pinna AD (2012) Hepatocellular carcinomas and primary liver tumors as predictive factors for postoperative mortality after liver resection: a meta-analysis of more than 35,000 hepatic resections. Am Surg 78:456–467

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Fromer MW, Gaughan JP, Atabek UM, Spitz FR (2017) Primary malignancy is an independent determinant of morbidity and mortality after liver resection. Am Surg 83:436–444

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Shubert CR, Habermann EB, Truty MJ, Thomsen KM, Kendrick ML, Nagorney DM (2014) Defining perioperative risk after hepatectomy based on diagnosis and extent of resection. J Gastrointest Surg 18:1917–1928.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Thornblade LW, Shi X, Ruiz A, Flum DR, Park JO (2017) Comparative effectiveness of minimally invasive surgery and conventional approaches for major or challenging hepatectomy. J Am Coll Surg 224:851–861

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Abu Hilal M, Aldrighetti L, Dagher I, Edwin B, Troisi RI, Alikhanov R, Aroori S, Belli G, Besselink M, Briceno J, Gayet B, D’Hondt M, Lesurtel M, Menon K, Lodge P, Rotellar F, Santoyo J, Scatton O, Soubrane O, Sutcliffe R, Van Dam R, White S, Halls MC, Cipriani F, Van der Poel M, Ciria R, Barkhatov L, Gomez-Luque Y, Ocana-Garcia S, Cook A, Buell J, Clavien PA, Dervenis C, Fusai G, Geller D, Lang H, Primrose J, Taylor M, Van Gulik T, Wakabayashi G, Asbun H, Cherqui D (2017) The Southampton consensus guidelines for laparoscopic liver surgery: from indication to implementation. Ann Surg

  8. Jin B, Chen MT, Fei YT, Du SD, Mao YL Safety and efficacy for laparoscopic versus open hepatectomy: a meta-analysis. Surg Oncol:2017

  9. Ciria R, Cherqui D, Geller DA, Briceno J, Wakabayashi G (2016) Comparative short-term benefits of laparoscopic liver resection: 9000 cases and climbing. Ann Surg 263:761–777.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Thake M, Lowry A (2017) A systematic review of trends in the selective exclusion of older participant from randomised clinical trials. Arch Gerontol Geriatr 72:99–102.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Lassen K, Høye A, Myrmel T (2012) Randomised trials in surgery: the burden of evidence. Rev Recent ClinTrials 7:244–248

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. von Elm E, Altman DG, Egger M, Pocock SJ, Gotzsche PC, Vandenbroucke JP (2007) The strengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology (strobe) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. Lancet 370:1453–1457.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Mangerud W, Kjelvik M, Krokan T: Activity data for somatic health care in the specialist health service 2016: Norwegian patient registry [in Norwegian]. Oslo, Helsedirektoratet, 2017

  14. Hoiberg MP, Gram J, Hermann P, Brixen K, Haugeberg G (2014) The incidence of hip fractures in Norway—accuracy of the National Norwegian Patient Registry. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 15:372

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Oie LR, Madsbu MA, Giannadakis C, Vorhaug A, Jensberg H, Salvesen O, Gulati S (2018) Validation of intracranial hemorrhage in the Norwegian patient registry. Brain Behav 8:e00900.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Angelsen JH, Horn A, Sorbye H, Eide GE, Loes IM, Viste A (2017) Population-based study on resection rates and survival in patients with colorectal liver metastasis in Norway. Br J Surg 104:580–589.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Lassen K, Nymo LS, Olsen F, Soereide K (2018) Benchmarking of an aggregated length-of-stay after open and laparoscopic surgery for cancer of the digestive system. BJS Open (in press) 2:246–253.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Nomesco classification of surgical procedures; in Care NCfCiH (ed), Nordic Centre for Classifications in Health Care, 2011,

  19. Belghiti J, Clavien P, Gadzijev E, Garden J, Lau W, Makuuchi M, Strong R: The Brisbane 2000 terminology of liver anatomy and resections: International Hepato Pancreato Biliary World Congress, Isis Medical Media, 2000, 2, pp 333–339

  20. Charlson ME, Pompei P, Ales KL, MacKenzie CR (1987) A new method of classifying prognostic comorbidity in longitudinal studies: development and validation. J Chronic Dis 40:373–383.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Quan H, Sundararajan V, Halfon P, Fong A, Burnand B, Luthi JC, Saunders LD, Beck CA, Feasby TE, Ghali WA (2005) Coding algorithms for defining comorbidities in icd-9-cm and icd-10 administrative data. Med Care 43:1130–1139.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Torzilli G, Vigano L, Giuliante F, Pinna AD (2016) Liver surgery in Italy. Criteria to identify the hospital units and the tertiary referral centers entitled to perform it. Updat Surg 68:135–142.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Colavita PD, Tsirline VB, Belyansky I, Swan RZ, Walters AL, Lincourt AE, Iannitti DA, Heniford BT (2014) Regionalization and outcomes of hepato-pancreato-biliary cancer surgery in USA. J Gastrointest Surg 18:532–541.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Silva JP, Berger NG, Yin Z, Liu Y, Tsai S, Christians KK, Clarke CN, Mogal H, Clark Gamblin T (2018) Minimally invasive hepatectomy conversions: an analysis of risk factors and outcomes. HPB (Oxford) 20:132–139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Shutt TA, Philips P, Scoggins CR, McMasters KM, Martin RC 2nd (2016) Permanent loss of preoperative independence in elderly patients undergoing hepatectomy: key factor in the informed consent process. J Gastrointest Surg 20:936–944.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Simons JP, Ng SC, Hill JS, Shah SA, Bodnari A, Zhou Z, Tseng JF (2009) In-hospital mortality for liver resection for metastases: a simple risk score. J Surg Res 156:21–25.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Simons JP, Ng SC, Hill JS, Shah SA, Zhou Z, Tseng JF (2010) In-hospital mortality from liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma: a simple risk score. Cancer 116:1733–1738.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Fretland AA, Dagenborg VJ, Bjornelv GMW, Kazaryan AM, Kristiansen R, Fagerland MW, Hausken J, Tonnessen TI, Abildgaard A, Barkhatov L, Yaqub S, Rosok BI, Bjornbeth BA, Andersen MH, Flatmark K, Aas E, Edwin B (2017) Laparoscopic versus open resection for colorectal liver metastases: the OSLO-COMET randomized controlled trial. Ann Surg

  29. Schneider EB, Ejaz A, Spolverato G, Hirose K, Makary MA, Wolfgang CL, Ahuja N, Weiss M, Pawlik TM (2014) Hospital volume and patient outcomes in hepato-pancreatico-biliary surgery: is assessing differences in mortality enough? J Gastrointest Surg 18:2105–2115.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Spolverato G, Ejaz A, Hyder O, Kim Y, Pawlik TM (2014) Failure to rescue as a source of variation in hospital mortality after hepatic surgery. Br J Surg 101:836–846.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Richardson AJ, Pang TC, Johnston E, Hollands MJ, Lam VW, Pleass HC (2013) The volume effect in liver surgery—a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Gastrointest Surg 17:1984–1996.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. de Haas RJ, Wicherts DA, Andreani P, Pascal G, Saliba F, Ichai P, Adam R, Castaing D, Azoulay D (2011) Impact of expanding criteria for resectability of colorectal metastases on short- and long-term outcomes after hepatic resection. Ann Surg 253:1069–1079.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Schroeder RA, Marroquin CE, Bute BP, Khuri S, Henderson WG, Kuo PC (2006) Predictive indices of morbidity and mortality after liver resection. Ann Surg 243:373–379.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  34. Halls MC, Cherqui D, Taylor MA, Primrose JN, Abu Hilal M (2018) Are the current difficulty scores for laparoscopic liver surgery telling the whole story? An international survey and recommendations for the future. HPB (Oxford) 20:231–236.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Kawaguchi Y, Fuks D, Kokudo N, Gayet B (2018) Difficulty of laparoscopic liver resection: proposal for a new classification. Ann Surg 267:13–17.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. McCulloch P, Feinberg J, Philippou Y, Kolias A, Kehoe S, Lancaster G, Donovan J, Petrinic T, Agha R, Pennell C (2018) Progress in clinical research in surgery and ideal. Lancet 392:88–94.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations


Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kristoffer Lassen.

Ethics declarations

Centre of Clinical Documentation and Evaluation (SKDE) holds a concession from the Norwegian Data Protection Authority to access data from the Norwegian Patient Registry (NPR) for patients treated at Norwegian hospitals in the period 1 January 2012 to 31 December 2016. The Norwegian Data Inspectorate licenced the data registry at SKDE (ref. 15/00271–2/CGN and 16/00289–2/CGN). Further ethical approval was not required according to Norwegian law.


Data from the Norwegian Patient Register has been used in this publication. The interpretation and reporting of these data are the sole responsibility of the authors, and no endorsement by the Norwegian Patient Register is intended nor should be inferred.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Lassen, K., Nymo, L.S., Olsen, F. et al. Contemporary practice and short-term outcomes after liver resections in a complete national cohort. Langenbecks Arch Surg 404, 11–19 (2019).

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: